Solomoni Anyigulile Kyangalilo vs Abrahamu Mwakibete ((PC) Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1998) [1998] TZHC 2338 (20 November 1998)

.I

IN TJTB IIIGH COURrc' OF TANZJIJHA AT MBEYA I (PC) CIVIL APHAL NO. 23 OF 1998 (From Rungwe District Court Civil Appeal· Nc•o 1 +9 of 199? Before: D.D. Komba. District :'fagistrate) . . . 3010MONI ANYIGULILE KYANGAL1LO ABHAPJUiU - lfrJAKIBETE Versus oaoooc-o<ien"'-'OCt ' JUDGMENT APPELLA.HT RESPONDENT This is a second appealG A tea sharnba measuring¼ acre was the centre of the dispute between the parties. The appellant, Solomon Anyigulile, sued the respondent, Abrah.amu Mwakibete, for it before the primary court of 1fa$ebeo The appellant lost the suit, and his first appeal to the district court of Rungwe was dismissedo Hence this second appeal in which both parties ent'ered appearances before me and told the C"'urt that they abided by the contents of the memorandum of appeal and the written reply to it respectively.' The appellant, who was the only witness in his side of the case, was the son of the late 1}nyigulile Ipenjola who died in February 1995. The shamba in dispute belonged to the late Anyigulile. The respondent cJ.aimed that the late Anyigulile sold the s::iamba to him for shs.300,000/::: ·in 199L1. The respondent ' ., . . ,. /': .. r summoned two witnesses in support of his side of the case. They.were the wife ' of the lte Anyigulile, Rehema Salwiba. (Dl:/2) ,· and their cell leader and .. neighbo (DW3). DW2 confirmed that her late husband sold the shamba to the respondent. After the death of Anyigulile the respondent wanted to cut down some tea plants on the shamba in order to build a house. He sunn~oned tea agricultural experts in order to seek theμ- "'Pinion and adviee;-- a,nd it was DW2 in'his presence who showed them the boundaries nf the shamba.. DW3 said he was

2 suJnmoned by the J.ate Anyigulile to witness the sale transaction of the shamba in dispute between him and the respondent. A police officer, tiurudini Nchimbi, · was· called .by te respondent to witness the transaction. The late Anyigulile took both witnesses and the respondent to the shamba and showed them the bouncl.aries. The saJ.e agreement was reduced in writing on 1.1.95, and it was duly signed by the seller (the late Anyigulile), the buyer (the respondent), and both witnesses9 With respect, I find no merit in this second appeal., The concurrent finding by both courts below that the land in dispute is the property of the resp8ndent could not be faulted on the evidence and in the circumstances. There was sufficient believable and material evidence which established en the balance of probabilities that the ownership of the shamba had passed on to the respondent consequent upon a valid agreement of sale between him .1. and the late Anyigulile, the former owner of the land. I find nothing in the meinorandu."11 of appeal which ~~ould have detracted from the "finding that the land in dispute belongs to the respondent. I accordngly dismiss this second appeal with costs here and in both courts below. .....-.:., .. {-' 1) : .. 1 AT MBEYA. 20 November 1998. For Appellant.: Absent. For Respondent: Absent. • BoP. MOSHI JUDGE • .. ··-~• .. - ... ~. •