Nganda s/o Mwalusepo vs Gwalikaha s/o Mjakiyanya (PC Civil Appeal No. 24 of 1981) [1982] TZHC 190 (27 October 1982)

4 IN THE }iIG-H COURT OF TANZANIA (pc. CIVIL A?PLAL NO0 24 OF 1981 (From the decision of the District qourt of Rungwe at Tukuya in Civil Appea' No. 127 of 1980 and Kandete Primary Coirt Civil Case No0 125 of 1980) / Before J.A.Mwakihaba Esq, District /Maistrate NGANDA S/OMWALUSEPO: ......... ::APPELLANT versus " * T GWALIKA1IA s/o MJAKIiYANYA : : .RESPONDENT : The acpo.11arit nda s/a wa1usopo successfully sued respondnt i ai cone a 'o 1 e-11yaya for a co orth shs08Q0t=...in the 2ima:j Court of in1,e he 2 Diotiic The rcsoL1cnt s t I JCL VVI th That udgmeñ't and thdrèfóro opaLcd to the District Court of Rungwe whoro, in iv tLrn 9 11 ws aLccesful 0 In the ?rimary Court the aopellant said that three years before he filed the suit he borrowed shillings o/= from the respondent and pledged a cow as socurity. He I ••:'. ., that the transaction witnosed by two :rsons - Saen ikieli (F\71) and one /Iasega 1,;1:akaso10 (P'72) In his evidence 1: 1 7.1 joni said ho had witnessed theocoasion. but that itt t;11 happened six years before th- ........................../ •.; - r -. - ie gav• cvidcnce in coirL wiio.a was on 158ye0 2W2- 'fiaea also confirmed ir± iitrossed the borrowing of hmde:and the pledging of the cow But according to h that I hack be fore ho was iiiarriea:t.: 4. .

• 2 * He said that subsequoitly, he E,ot married and that he now has grandchildren by his dauhtcre who wore born after the event The resandont made a imp10 donial of having lent shs 0 2C to the appellant or receiving covi fromf him as security for the loan. The Primary Court unanimdsly believed the appellant and his ;'iitnesos 0 It sooms to mc tIle acoollent :nJ his two witnesses could not have been talking about the same occassion The very wide disparity between the evidence of the appell and his witnesses and between the witnesses themselves regarding the time the loading of the ionoy took place makes one suspicions that oithcr tho appellant had no witnosucs and had to resort to .gottin'. false .witnessos.'. whom he cul.d not drill sufficiently 'before they:. gae::r . theirl ovidcnc- ' ~ , or the whole claim waL fabricatede I do not know which is which but, this urIcrtainTty,cannot..c haye. positivo rcsults,i'or.the appellant, TI'ie,. Qlaim . was, not proved on a .balsne of. prob,ability. as it, is, m ore pxohabio t.han, not that the appellant initiated a false case against t h e rosponont sc,c no.morit, in, th i s appeal which, is dismissed with cos, . . ' . :' . ........ J..A. OSO AT MEIYA , JUDGE N A'crtifod bo of thi judont should be' sent to the District Court of Ruiag . to ha read. :to tho.. parties...."..