Skip to document content Skip to main menu Skip to search

High Court Land Division

High Court Land  Division was established as a result of the land reforms which were implemented by the Land Act 1999. Until 2010, the Land Court had exclusive jurisdiction to determine land disputes relating to land with a pecuniary value of TZS 50,000 or more. 

7 judgments
Advanced search
All years
Filters
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Labels
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
7 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
March 2012
Peter Mwendisinga vs Asha Yusufu (Misc. Land Appeal 32 of 2010) [2012] TZHCLandD 17 (29 March 2012)
Appeal dismissed; adverse possession and ownership upheld based on oral evidence and unpleaded-documentary complaints not entertained.
Land law – appellate review limited to issues raised below; proof of title/occupation — absence of written sale document does not preclude ownership finding; adverse possession — may be established by oral evidence; burden of proof of prior occupation on claimant.
 29 March 2012
Saida Said vs Reginald Charles (Misc. Land Case Appeal 61 of 2008) [2012] TZHCLandD 144 (23 March 2012)
High Court set aside appellate tribunal’s award of ownership, finding the sale document defective and restoring the vendor’s family’s rights.
Land dispute — validity of alleged sale agreement — thumbprint signature and absence of street chairman’s signature/stamp — assessors’ opinion — ownership of residential plot and removal of water business/tank — appellate decision set aside.
 23 March 2012
Abdallah A. Mkongo and 3 Others vs The Director General Tanzania Building Agency and 3 Others (Land Application 49 of 2012) [2012] TZHCLandD 120 (22 March 2012)
Reported
Representative suit without fresh leave and a defective affidavit (Order I r8; Order XIX r3) led to striking out with costs.
Civil procedure — Representative suits — Mandatory leave under Order I Rule 8 — Leave must relate to the particular suit; prior leave in different struck‑out suit not valid. Civil procedure — Affidavits — Order XIX Rule 3 limits affidavits to facts within deponent's personal knowledge; conclusions, legal arguments or prayers render affidavit defective. Remedy — Defective affidavit renders accompanying application incompetent and warrants striking out rather than selective deletion of paragraphs.
 22 March 2012
Athumani Rajabu Shomvi vs Fatuma Abdallah (Misc. Land Appeal 137 of 2008) [2012] TZHCLandD 135 (21 March 2012)
An appeal was allowed and the District Tribunal’s proceedings quashed because the respondent lacked legal authority to prosecute the appeal.
Locus standi; representation in Land Disputes tribunals; Regulation 13(1) Land Disputes Court (District Land and Housing Tribunal) Regulations 2003; requirement for power of attorney or letters of administration; nullity of proceedings where appellant lacks legal authority.
 21 March 2012
Justin Sekumbo vs Eladius Tesha (Land Appeal 19 of 2006) [2012] TZHCLandD 125 (21 March 2012)
Application for leave to appeal dismissed as time-barred after earlier leave application was struck out; extension of time required.
Civil procedure – Appeals – Leave to appeal to Court of Appeal – Time limit under Rule 43(a) (14 days) – Effect of striking out an earlier leave application for being improperly filed – Whether Limitation Act s.21(2) excludes time while struck-out application pending – Requirement to apply for extension of time.
 21 March 2012
Kambarage Kajura vs Ladslaus Mahendeka & Another (Misc. Land Case Appeal 27 of 2008) [2012] TZHCLandD 143 (21 March 2012)
Procedural mislabelling and jurisdictional defects at ward and district tribunals rendered land dispute proceedings null and void.
Land law – Jurisdiction of Ward Tribunals – Distinction between village council mediation (reference) and appeals – Irregular procedure and mislabelling of proceedings – Jurisdictional error and incurable procedural defects – Non-enforceability of village council determinations by courts.
 21 March 2012
Issa Abdallah Mikui and 44 Others vs The Project Manager Import Co. Ltd. (Misc. Land Aplication 40 of 2010) [2012] TZHCLandD 20 (6 March 2012)
Once a notice of appeal is filed, the High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant a stay of execution; the Court of Appeal must be approached.
Jurisdiction – stay of execution – effect of notice of appeal – once a notice of appeal is filed the Court of Appeal is seized and the High Court ceases jurisdiction; Order XXI r.24 Civil Procedure Code inapplicable after appeal commenced; stay applications should be brought in the Court of Appeal unless directed otherwise.
 6 March 2012