M/S T. M. Enterprises vs Chairman of Duka la Ushirika (HC Civil Case No. 29 of 1989) [1990] TZHC 496 (19 December 1990)

,,. --- ----------.----- --- .. ·_ ~ ·:·-3- ·-· ·- - •· . ----- ..... . IN TITE IIT GII C OURr 0:[P T liEZ_l-i.lH .A if:r Mlf.i'.ii.\iZ.A

• ·- illGh COUI{r crv.:.L C@E im.29 OF 1989 M/S To 1110 El. 1 IT:..-.;HF"RI.0S. e "° o •••• o ••• ." ••••••••• o •• •••• PLJJ:NTIFF Versus CIU.IRM.ii.l OF DUKA LA "G:5BIRIK.ll. ~ K.LIT1 A Yi:.. N-Y .tfdi:iJiiJ.'v i,. - MW.Af.ifZ.A ..... ♦• 0 o_o e O O O. O O o o O O .DBJrffiDAJT MW JLu;_;Jii'J1-.l, J • . The plaintiff M/S T. lvi. Enterprises is a s1.1b-tenant of the defend.ant at the premiaes situated on Plot rio5 .Block T, Uyerere Road in Mt=rnnza. M"OJ.?-ioipali ty. The plaintiff has filed this suit preying for a permanent injunction restraining the defenclant from b.terforing wi tb. the IP aoeful ·, enjoyment of the suit premises. The plaintiff has also claimed Shs.140,000/~ ~.-d.ama.50;,., being the oxpences incurred by the plaintiff in renovating the . '·· promises and 'installing shelves but which were removed by tho defendant. 'hd the plaj_~tiff. so.-01-a.5.nis. Sb..s.2, ooo, 009/=-··dzmaies being tho financial loss c2.usod to the plaintiff by th0 defendant when ho interfered with tho sub-toncll:1oy. The a.c:fcj.'lcla,.---it :rir/s Duka la Ushirika, Kata ya Hyamagana, Mwa.nza :rosistod tho olmm, contGnd:i.ng that at no time did he sub-let tho St.\i t promises. · wao The fi.mt issue thatLdra.ftod at tho comm0i.1comoi1t of tho tri'.al was: Did tho cl.ofc,1d.aut lawfully sublet part of tho m::J.t :promioos to the plaintiff? Boforo I pl'Occicd wHt tho ca.'3o I wish to dis:90s0 of 0110 procedurnl aspect of tho J>load:i.ugs. On 9/10/1989 tho dofcndc:nt filed its wrltt.011 str,tcmc:nt of dofonoo and the plaintiff :replied 011 28/6/1990. Thon again on 27 /8/19')0 t;.10 defendant purported to file an Eu"i'lcndod wri ttcn Gtatomcnt of defence wi t::iout leave o:f tho Court. That was i:rrogular, for tho amondod wri ttcn statcmo11t of dofo1cc could not be filed without leave of tns Court. 1faat I will do is to ig.1or::i tho amended written statement of d0f011cc, and concentrate on tho oricinaJ. wri ttcn statement of defence. Evidence regarding tho sub-lGtting part of tho suit promises was as I follows. Sometimes early 1987 tho dofo;.1dant co-operative socio:by was in

financiol doldrums md so it decided to s1.1b-lct part of tho suit promises. They pc'"'13tocl on tho door a notice for whoever wc:atod to lea.so part of that promises. Tho plaintiff Vido b.io. lotter (Exh. Co Plail1tiff) :responclod ~o that notice, and thcro woro matv ot:1or l'.lJi,lica.nts includin&,' tho Cha.ini1ai1 of tho dofo:1d.ant co-operative society. 1£tcr IX)msing all_ tho appHcations, tho ox0cutivo commi ttoo of the defendant co-opcrati·:·c society, tho plai;.1tiffts application wa::f accepted.. Tho mooting of the sa,:i.d cxocu.ti vo committoo wao l1ot cb.a.:i.:rod by tho Chail!ila.a of tho society ns ho wa.'3 also an applica".lt 7 tho oame wa.s cb.uirod by tho Vico-'Jhr.innai.1- The dcfo:1d.ant co-operative socitjy w:rotc a letter (Exh. A - p].2,j_ntiff) tolli.116

hJ.m t:1c.t ho had boon accepted ao ;,.,/.U.,.l,_ .. _ ,~ •,, L'., L

·~~ i.; ..J<,C. l' . t r . • j :; " "t-. ,- ·, ·- - ·- . - .,... .. -. 2 tho pro81)00tivo sub-tenant. Tllo defendant co-operative nocioty is tho tcaant of tho Rce;':i.Ht1ar of Builcli.:."'.lgs., '"'Cco:rd.i:1g to the Brnt RcrJt:r.;stion J.ot Ko.17/1984 no tenant oru:1 01..1b-lot vnlons tho lQlldlo:rd oor-lGOi.1ts(' So tho matter uc::s rofcrrcd to tho l!llooation ?omm;i t:t;..Q.Q. for i to oonsonto Tho l.Qlocation Commi ttoo on behalf of tl10 landlord dt:ly gave its conoont to tho sub-lotting vido i to lotter¼ ·D-plaintiff e_atod 19/5/1987. .ind on 20/5/1987 the landlord duly isnuod a oub-t0nancy ug-roomont {E.xh. E-plai:nt:i.ff) to tho plaintiff., T'.D.o plai1tiff puid the koy-dopoai t money a.."ld housoro:nt vido receipts .F-plciatiff., JJ.l those trannactions have boon oonf:bmod by the then sb.op-manc,.gor of tb.o dofcndni.1t 'a shop d tho suit-promises XII:iFJS Mwajuma d/o 1\bdalluh (PW 0 3) as well an the then ' . ., socrot.::,,:cy of tho defendant 00-0 pore.ti vo ::;ooiety ivh"Oo Rellama F\mdiki:ra {:Pi-r o2 )_ l.iftor tho plaintiff had become a sub-•tc.,.lE'nt ho ste .. rtod to build a partition wall in tho suit :prcm:i.sco and aloo ercr;tod Gome ob.cl vco. 1 .. building oontraotor Mr. Wilfred Owiro (P1-T.4) built the p2,:;"iii tion wall and orootcd. shelves and we.s paid Shs.140, ooo/= vide tho receipt :ex::•-• J-plai;1tiff. A few dcli)r □ later the plai:1tiff found hirnDolf ojootod from t).20 su.i t pmiscn and tho pa,1--ti t:i.on · wall uvn domoliohcd. It ww-.:.: tho dofo:ndurit ' □ car:.io that tho pt..n"l)Ortcd ::mb-tonazwy agroouo:.:1t divcGtin;3; half of the 1ncr.1ioes to tho plaL--itiff was void. Tl:i.c ·ohai_roan of t:io dofo10.ant oo-0J_X;r2-tj.vo oooicty Mr 3aJ.im mri (DW,.1) toDtified tllat tho oxocutivo- ooa:11ttcc thct decided to sub-lot part of tho suit prc;:.1i::;os wa.o not proprly cmwt:1.tutod a □ t].cro uoro only tb.:rQo 1notecld of tho m:i.J1.iru.1.r.1 ol five mo □ bc1·s an per no26 and £J. 22 of tho Society's Conoti tution (,, C-d.o:f'o.1100)" Noroovor tllo '1··1.· t··1csr t-r•tif'iod th,..,t "''"r8'l"'nt to a 15(-1 '(·· \ of -'·-. (), ... '1 r,+·::· 1 '.'' ,/:o;:r+i + 01 tio11 :t .:. J, VU •- (..., l.A· , .. ,A • C...- J . ·l / • J._.. J • ,, _ ,1 'J,.,,,; •-' - ••. t J ., •• V, . .. tho Exec ·.tj_vc CJommittco of the society h2..0 :10 poucr to f70ll t!J.o propcj: 1 7 of '&'..:;.e society without tho conocnt of tho Gone:rnl faocubly o Thet io wl.zy it i::; ;:.;c::;:.c'. a. properly oo:mti tutod Ex:ooutivo Comr;1ittec snt 011 9/6/1987 vido ninutos (IB,-.b.oP- dofonoo) c:1.11d decided to l1c1vo the sub-to11m10y revoked., Indoocl. they purportcc1 to 1"Cvoko it and 00L1n11..1n:icatod it by lotter (Exb .• E--dofenco) to tho :,:,lm.;.1tiff on 10/6/1987., /ind aoti:::1g on tb.c minutes of tho cxocutivo comni ttoo of tho dofo:ndont co-operative society, the 1 ":l.locdion Comm ttoc of tho 12.nd.lo:rd purported to revoke· its conoont to tho sub-lcttincs of part of the oui t prcnisos by its lotter dated 27/6/1987 which io E.xll 0 G-<lofcnoot> i.i:ld by a lotter d2.ted 30/6/88 t!10 land.lord (Rcgistro.r of Builclings) purported to revoke tho s1.1b-tcrnncy 9 md tho scj.d lotter wan· accepted as 1lxh. R.:_dofoncc A housing officer of ·t-b.o Rogiotrc,r of buildings Mro Yuoufu .liliodi Konbo (DT. 7) testified the.t rd.nee 30/6/1988 tho plaintiff u2.D no lonr,-or their m:'.h-tomi.ntl) Dvi.do:1cc i;-rao D.Cl.ducod by tho defendant rJooict;r a.s regards tho domoli tion of tho p2.rti tion wall tb,;1t had boon built by tho plaintiff O liocor:ding to Mro JtuJa:1110 a/o Isika (D.r.5) from the dcpe .. rtnc:nt of tho Hi.mioipaJ. E1.1gl11oor of Mm:i..nza !-Iu:.1idpal C0tmcil, it wo..c::i lJ.i::: d.c:partDc:.J.t n5.:i.ol1 decided to donoliBh tho partition mill because ;.10 bqj,ld,:i.nq pc:mij; hncl been cro:1tod for tho samo 0

/ ,· ./' ··-- - ---·- 3 So the Chci:rr-12..'.1 of tho C:.cfc:1dunt nocioty Dt.;ro 1 .• testified. thc..t it -12.s not thorn who hc::d · clor,1oliF.:hed. the partition wallo In fnct it m:!.f.l tho. In:::poctor of Th.1ildinsn of tho Muanz.a... fuuicipru._ .Council ·11r •. Junczme o /o Ioikc (DU o 5) who doooliohcd the partition mill tog'Othcr with hie ota:ff. Tho · rsono prooont at tho o.cf:lolition woro Mr. I. :B. Chudasama (mr.2) tho ton 0011 lcc.clc:r, then tho dofondo.:1t'o ohop-attondant· (m1.3) ru:1d a noieLbour Mr. Juoa. s/o Rajabu (Dw.4) 0 Tho:Jo 1rit:;:1ooccs teotifiod the,t after the officials of the Mrrn.,'1.za Municipal CouncH cJ.onoliohod tho p2.rtition uall, they took with them tho cupboard, a opo, e..nd oot10 cenont and co1:1ont blocks and oigned a doour.Jont (Exh. L-dofo:100) to signify their taking of tho s900 0 On tho first ioouo, r.zy fL"ldil1g iD tb.ut tho dofend.aat did law:fully sub-lDt half of its p:rcnisos to tho plat.1tiff. Thero io coi1croto doouno:nta.:ry ovidcnoc to that effect. TD.O defendant bofoi--c sub-lotting :rcq_uirod the consent of tho lnad.lo:rd. (rJco s.37;( 1 )(q.) of the Rent Rcntriction 1..ot lfo, 17/1984 a"'tld tb.is uruJ duly givo:1 <-'.S p;;r DxlJ.. D-plai:1tiff • In f2..0t the dcfc;.1d.ant co-operative. oooicty om1cedo tb.2-t there u2..S ouch rmb-lott:i..J.1g, but co:1tond that tho 01..1b-lott:l.::.1_; wan a nullity. I:.1 ey judgncnt I fi...'1d that tho arguoc:.1t t: .. d tho oub-letti.."'1€,' m:u:J a nullity io nioco21oci voclo 1J. though no 15 (a) ( v) of tllc dofm1dant society' o Con3ti tution sti1,nlo,tcs thr.t tho Exeouti vo Cor.u:ii ttco of tte oooioty l,.M no power to ooll the property of the :::::ooicty without t]:.c oo:;:too:1t of tho Gcnercl i.soombly, I fi10. tlw,t thoro wao no qcllinr,,;, of m:ry proportr in thio 02:Joo Sub- lotting io qui to different froo ::iolli11 0 property,) Though the j]xcct1ti vo Conni ttoo that dooidod to m.1b-lc,t l)E.ort of t!lo prcoiGeG hm :;.iot p"Opcrly cons ti tutcd i tcclf h1 tb.c:i.t it b.D.d no qu o:run, yet VJ.OlT I 31:1 of the fj.rr..1_Lthot it tm tho or:ite.:JI)i];i.J..g authority to sub-let pa.rt of the oui f prcraio00. J,. pri_:1cipe.l uho ccto in ouch a.. way C.D to lc2.d otb.cr people to t!Jink the..t tho r,eont they arc doru..iag w:i.th io the :r(n'J. 2,c;-c1t, cc..'not be allowed to diaow:1 tllc:~t -<mt. For c:;;:1:.nplc i;.1 the cc.so of :::+lnund Sclw,ttor & Co, (Uggndg) Ltq., Vro, Pdcl; 596i} E 0 i:o 252, a p:n>aon purported to bo an ngcnt of tho pr:i .• 1cipcl for tho μi.r-po::;c of oelling GoL1e lo.ml of tho Priucipcl. D.1 fact tho allec,;cd 0-t:,"'Cnt had 110 authority to ocll the l,r.d in di □ puto. Mr. Ju:::::tioc Lew of tho E.,J..C • .i-;. oxplt..incd the pb.cno11011on: "The tent of 03tcnsible ,.uthori ty 2.0 I tn1dcrotcmd i t 1 in wl1r.t en o:rdine!'IJ· pJ rcon donl.ing with tho 2t,'70nt 0CJ1 rc[',[Jonnbly usouno in tho aboonco of o.J.1,Y :1ohco to the contrary to be hin authority 0 In tl:o prcrJe21t caoc, I think n purcha.ocr docli;.1g ui th the c-es021t for a nmod prL1oipcl wns c:.1ti tlod to mnuno tb.nt tho <¥,'C:nt hc.d autllori ty" 41 ind in yet 2.notl,.or 00£0, tho doctrine of ootonGiblc mttor:i. ty wro applied wi. th tho intention of dolivoring juutico. That io tho once of Ya H 4 KP.Pi,;diA YWe Thclmrsoy LeJ0:1icl2.o& J.196.ij Eo k 378 wherein Now'bold J. 4 rJtatod:

■ ~ . ~-- '

• ....... !' J . ................. ~ ...... ...·-··.,: .__ - _# ____ , -·--,. .. _ .. ,., ,' ........... ..... - .. - ... ,--··- 4 "Whore tho true· om1cr bf goods • 9 0 O C. 0 . i-.J.lo1rs tho cnt to clo2l i:ri th tllc· goocl..G 2..0 if·· tb.oy wore hi □ own, then tho t ruo, 'ormor is p:rooludod m I c.gainot 2, tLf:tl part;/ who doe.lo l2onafido9 with tho good.s mcl. ,,itb,out the kaovlod.cro of--lJl.Q. ri.gh:ts. a.f ··t110 ·truo ovmo.r frorj denying tho nuthori ty of tl10 &._;ont to dccl with tho goodn · . in tho n2.11nor in which thoy wore doal.. t with" .• T:.20 nbovo obfJorvo,tiono 2,ro. og_uully ap:pliocbl,9 to tb.9 : i present Oi.',/JOa Tho dof0,.1cl.mt.-oo-opcrdivo EJocict--J iG prooludod fro □ st2.tin 6 tb.2.t the Farocv.tivo ConrJ.i ttoo ho,d no r,o1rcr to ·oub-lot · tho suit prooioca-·wb.cn· tho plcint:iff docl. t ui th tb.2.t oor:mi ttoo °Qonq, fi clo md without tho k-1ouloclgo of Society 1 :J Constitution. Obvlo't-1oly tho Exooutivo Comi:iittoo in quontion b.D.d tho oetoa:::iblo . w.thority to ::::ub-lot tho ·p:r-::mioo-o in g_uootion,. Tho :noxt q1..1cotic1, io,: ww the rrnb-tcn:!.:.,.oy ever lrnr.f'ully rovolmd'? I think tlie anmror to thio quoGtfon io VCr<-J oinplo. Tho prcoi::::oo in q1..1ootion ure oubjoot to tllo E,cnt Rqnttlgtj,0::2 ;ct 1:To. 11/1984, l::b.d.or a. 25 of tbJt 1..ot c tenancy nay bo rovokod or tontd.21:tcd by 2. Rcgioncl Ifo1.,u:d.!ig Tribuncl or·tt.o oidol1t J'.i:,.'.:,i.otrc,to'o Court. D:1 tLo i::1oto.11t ci1'3o no m.1oh institutiono uoro over iJ.wokodo Tb.o dofo:1Cl2.nt docidocl to uoc a broyu ng;m octhod in o.oquirine; tho ponooooion of t1:.o proni::ioo it hcrl i:mb-lot. Th.'.'.t uns grooolj[ irrogulcr. 1.i oub-to1c..nt in :protected by tho Ront Rcctriction 1.ct frod m-bi tr.?.:cy- ojecti:10,.1t i'ron pronioco jv.Gt 2..3 io tho tenant _J.ri.rnclf iG protected - 000 04, 3( 1) of' tho Rc 1 rt Rooi;;riction ui th clofinoo 11 tc:1t'....rioy 1 to iuolt:clo o., sub-ton2i1cy. So r.-,y 2l1Gi·TOr to t20 cc.concl. quor.::tion io ttut the fJt1b-to:1Q1cy io not yet to1T.:in2.todi, It io rJtill ouboiotil1gn Tho thi:rtl ioouo i;J c'1J ro11rdo the olci.n of Shso 140,000/== 213 conpc11a2..tio11 for tb.o donoli:.,hod pn:ri;j tion ucJ.l. My D .. 1oucr to thc..t qucotio:1 iG i:1at it w2..o not the dofonclo.nt who cloi:1olj_f31od tho pc.rti tion wall. Tho Mc·w..11za i'I1..micipnl Co1.ndl throue,t. ito 2C,'0:1t t1r. Junnnno o/o Ioiko (DH.,5) hc.."J confo::mod tlio,t ·it mJ.'.J tho 0110 lTho dor.101ioJ:cd the partition well bocmoo tho plai.11.ti.ff l:.2..el not oought t:.10 building pcm:1:i. t. L.1 tJ:.c oirc1..10otDZ1coo I cr.1 of tho vim-r thnt tho dofonclmt oo-oporc:.tivo aocicty is not li2.bl9 -for tl.::.is cl2..ir1 of Shs.140,000/~ Tho lmt ioouo thc:t m:s drafted 1rru:i OD to whether the p].2-btiff ia o:1titlod to Sha.,2,000,000/= P.,/J opooil'J. dm<;;,'"-'OG., Uufortum1toly the plmntiff in :..io ovido:100 in ohiof, clicl :1ot o-labornto no to how ho oc:u:10 b;y· thd figure. Y...:.1 tho plcint ho noroly :Jtr;too th2.t boo2.uoo ho / ,.: han boon 1..u11~--.:u:fully cjoctod f1--on tho oui t pror.1ioc □, tho:1 that ha..'J. rooul tccl. in tho fin2.1.:i.c:i.c:iJ. looo of ;:_;7,.o. 2, ooo, ooo;;=.- - I· rn .10t .sure if thnt roprooonto loao of buoinooo or noro c12'"J.:.~-cl? for non-uoo of tho )ror:1iooo. What I k:1ou io .that tb.o 12..1-r otipul2.too tlrnt :::1x;ci cl.mr:goo h2vo to bo otrictly proved. Tho:roforo ru:zy cluin for loo::; of kt:Jinooo ca:.mot bo £',Wc:.:rdocl c.o tto plaintiff J.::.m ncd.o. no effort to o:Jto.bliah tho □, loa;vo alone . L c fron doing □ o Dtrictly c..-:i roquil'Cd by l[',W., But I note tb.2.t pl2.i:1tiff ::.m boo:1 cloprivocl tho uoo of tho prooiGOG unlr,1lfully by tho c1.efo,.~tlc.at 2.nd

5 ~ for that tl10 pl2.intiff io o:1ti tlod to oor.10 clCT:ie.goo. IIc hnD bocn dc:privcc1 tho use of tho prorJiDco fo.r throe a.ad l..:.D.J.f ;yec:.m 1101,i;. I c;r,::.:cd tho plci.ntiff Sho:50,000/=. 2n daoc.goc ·f.ox non-uoo of .tho .prooaos In tho cvoat I JJ2ko the fllQW:t.lG. ·on.le. Tho plP-intiff io cl..ocl2.ro'" ;• .. •,. :· to bo n, lcwful oub-to:1,:,pt cr·::c.1£ of tl:o suit ·J.):rooiooo. I 2J·fo:cl the plciati .. .,. -·•··· S!1::;i.50,000/= e..s dar.1ago::ffo:rnonuoo or' tho pror.1inoo~ Tho:rcfo:ro tho plci.ntiff . ,•· .. ·. . . ..:. .,,,. .. - . ' . "' . ·-: pnrtly 0uccoodo ~1cl I mtor j·ud@::lont for tl.{o pin111t°iff on the r:foro::iaid . . ' . . · ton.10. 'rho pltintiff io mrdod tho costo of the. mii t. Omer· accorclil1gly,. JUDGE 19/12/1990 Covr:Pa-. Judgno11t dolivo:rod in. Oh01:1bcro :i.:a t:'..O proocncc of the partiooe Lt ?-li-J 2.az a, ! 9th Doc?t1bc r, 1990. ... .. .C'