Salum Ismail vs Juma Abdallah (H/C Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1989) [1990] TZHC 487 (28 November 1990)

IN T:IE }II GIT co·uaT OF T AlTZAlHA AT TABORA. H/C CIVIL J.FFI:AL HO• 2 ·oF 1989 ( ORIG=::tAL iaGOI 1 .Jt :01:::/,:·:1.:cc"T' co·:.·.:rr-T CIVIL Cf..fiE 1:JO ... . 22 OF J.988) . . SLLC.l:iI ISI,J1.IL. • 0 • O O • 0 0 O O <> 0 0 0 o • 0 0 0 0 & 0 o e O •• o e ~;. e .APPELIJJTT VZPSTJS. Ju11A IJ3DALLA.1.T.f •••• .,., • .,.,. o .............. • o • ••••• RESPOlIDElilT • Cl1IPETA, .J • ' ' ! I : . .J U D G r:1 E U _T •

The appellant·, Salum Isi:-la,il, uerl t.'.1e responrlent, .Tuma Abdallal1, for recover;;·-of plot lfo. 06"· 1 1Jlock lJI Ujiji) 11H;;.-iin tlle townsnp o:f KigoG~~Ujiji 1 a.nd for damages for defaiT.ation. T'De plaintiff ts case was that his :fat:10r ha,::_ built a hut on the plot 2,m ·U--..a.t his f,att.er died. in 1938'. T'.D.ere2.:f-'cer the hut was .u..'1.der tJJ.e cohtrol of one Swaleh Salur11 lrgoi Ul'ltil in 1974 when the said Sw8.leh Salun 1:T,goi died'111 T;.:.c plaintiff does n<1t clearly state in w::.iat had. ·control over l:;he plot. 1..fter 1974, the • t J • ;.," .:ic1.· 1\T_c,,...J.\ Cape,CJ. 'j7 G,.e Oo,.. l 1 1 0 v appell8.lr'c r.::.:i..c3. not ·know whr;t :"lappened to the plot. In Septe,nber, 1987, a,:1m1J.1ter of the la:~e Is,::la.il Salum, one Maarv.:si IsDail, was appoti-i-l;ec-:. administrator of the estate of her f2:'c)1er, hu-t; i·b is not ste,tzi:.1- wb.2,t property of the estate w2..s to be ad.ministered. Naa.:rt:.si Isn1c--iil; however, cla.ined t;_:,.;,,t part o:f the esta.te was ·t;!~~e hut on the plot. T'ue respondenJc ts c2,se was simple a11d strai:;J,.tforw2,,rcl. His evirlGnce was ·t;}:,.2 .. t t):1e plot wa.s alloc2;i;ed to :!J.im by Kie:;oma

Ujiji township aut;:i.orit~,r in 1986 ancl tl1at '-e dWl1S a rig:,.t of occupan.e;:r No. 296 e,nd 237 da·tcd 21st August, 1987 (w:..•ic:!2 WGre tcncl..e:i:ccL as Ex::1ibit D., 3 )~ T.lrnre:::tfJcer , he stc,.rtocl clevcl0:9ing tie plot On t'..1.::>.t cvie .. ence, tb.e t:i:ial court J.12.d no cli:fficul ty in ho ld.ing t:!J.2,t t}:.e plot we,s in t:J.e i~~ai1age;:.10,1.t of 2£.vcWc pc..ries. U.i'ltil 1986 wb.en a 001;-:3_;0·011.t ant:1ority alloc2:tcd t:..-..e plot to t'.ie re8ponc1 .. ent., · The ·I;:r:Lal c01°.rt accorcl:l.i1.glf l 0 .eld. t::>.at ·the rig_:,_tful u1.er of the plot Wi tlc. gret renpect to t;}.o appellc111.t, cvitlonce a[,:.:>,inst 1io clai.1-a is ovcrwhelt1ing. 'I'hc plot wc1,o 12,wfully alloc,::"/cecl to t1e reGpo'lclont by a cor,1potcnt aut:1ori ty. It wo,:J not s:.:'.own tll2,t t:1.e .::,ut:ori ty

• 2

2 which allocatecJ. tl1c plot to the rcopond.ont '.1w no p2.v10ro to do no or tht it o..ctod no..l fide. If' the appellant fccla o,ggTieved, ho ohould. conplc,in againGt tigor:ia -· Ujiji Tom1.:::::-.ip aut;:iori t;y • For tJ::i..ooc roaoono, thio C1.ppo2.l fails ancl oo io hereby d.isnioocd .. with costs. Ti:..BORt 28th Fovonbor, 1990: Parties a,boent •. /; '//, / .·. , ; t• I.'! . 1 •.' ' .. '. I,/:'!<,, ., . .• I/ ,;"·' .' v---- ... --.: 1r·,, ,·,:,.,.:' / / .. ;•. ·. ;F 0 /, . · t-...;.;i-,., .·,,, i l( I /' /j V /Bo f>'-s;ui,r{f:r1(,,;./4'. · ., c• .f/ ,<:( f . . : < . • '· ' ,' \ ic_, r · .. _'.JUDGE \'-, '\ -: .. : k'f'<<·-·· : ·. ; =~ i ,,... ' . . ... / ,.,.-_.J . ,\1) ·. : . . / j ">r -'. .. . / ... '-:,..'< / / . ----- ./ ;."'+..;.:;,;-;;..,;.!'.-'.'. ~::;,-' ... \ .