africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • All jurisdictions →

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[1983] TZHC 488Tanzania

Hermes Nyamhanga vs Pili Elisha ((PC)\ Civil Appeal No. 181 of 1982) [1983] TZHC 488 (28 May 1983)

High Court of Tanzania

Judgment

..... IN THE' HIGH COURT or TANZANIA (In the District Registry) (PC) CIVIL APPEAL NO. 181 OF 1982 (Fro;n the decisron of the District Court of at ii1uguaiu in Civil Appci.al No. 10 of 1982 - R.I. Luku.nu, Fsq., District lliagistra te and Original K-:myama l'ri,nary Court Civil Gase No. 1 of 1982): HER/lFS NY1H4HliNGA C, 0 • • • . . . . . : : APPFLLiH'JT varsus PILI ELISHA •' . 0 0 e • . . . . RFSPONDEN'I' JUDGF 1 r1FNT '.liUNYFR.l\ 1 J • : Thi'! respond"?nt was the applicant/plaintiff in Kenya.na PrLnary Court. She clai-nP.d 12 h13ad of cattle as co;npensation for e,xpe.ns,rn incurred in bringing up of two children one for 5 and the other for 1 . 2 2 years. The facts show th.at the parties are man and wife but they are living apart since 1977. The l'espondent tried to s2ourc . a divorce but was defeatP.d in C~ c. 115/78 ( sa;ne court). Her father has, notwithstandings, refund(:d t.he bridewealth. The respondent took the two childl"en on 27 /12/81. In turn the appellant cleimr1d . .' .. ,:' co;npensation for :naintenance. · The trial court almost dis,nisscc1 . the claim. She was awarded only Shs. 1,000/=• She app13al'ed to the Di°strict Court of 1Vlugu.nu and on. Thi'! District 111.agistra te awardc1d her 12,000/.,, -'instead of 12 head of .cattle. The husband appealed to this court. On 'the q·uestion of abligation I am ·entirely in agreement with thr: le2rnC:Jd District Magistratn, thP. father is alw.:::iys responsiblG fo!' maintaining his children. If the mother .naintains them she.\ is entitled to rei:nbursement. In this case the appPllant was linbl(!. to reimburse the rPspondent hGr expenses. Th'? only point in thG appral is the ass"!ss;n,:,nt of' the quantu.n. The respondnt estiJ12tcd her expGnses as 12 h 0 ad of cattlr, while th'? District ,Yiagistratc stimated then at Shs. 12,000/=• Taking into account ths villagci life, I a;n of the view that thr:; a;nount is exc 0 ssiv. I reduce the award to Shs. 6,000/=. Fach party (appellant did not want to 'attend) to bear own costs. tl'lvWNZ/1 28/5/83 I.ft;, F. ir:ff UN'YFRli JUDGF

Discussion