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. 

152 judgments
  • Filters
  • Judges
  • Alphabet
Sort by:
152 judgments
Citation
Judgment date
October 2024
Court recorded parties' settlement as consent judgment, making deed binding and the suit withdrawn.
Land law; consent judgment — recording and enforcement of Deed of Settlement under Order XXIII r.3 and s.95 CPC; recognition of ownership; payment of outstanding purchase price; obligation to execute transfer documents; binding effect and bar to subsequent suits.
31 October 2024
Extension of time to seek revision refused for inordinate delay, unreliable affidavit, non‑apparent illegality and forum shopping.
Extension of time – Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) – applicant must account for all delay; inordinate delay fatal. Illegality – alleged lack of locus standi/power of attorney – must be apparent on face of record to justify extension. Affidavit credibility – falsehoods render affidavit unreliable. Abuse of process/forum shopping – concurrent proceedings weigh against extension.
31 October 2024
Extension of time granted to file notice of appeal due to apparent illegality on the face of the record.
Civil procedure — Extension of time to file Notice of Appeal — s.11(1) Appellate Jurisdiction Act — requirements for good cause: promptness, accounting for each day, prejudice — illegality as exceptional ground must be apparent on face of record — financial inability not sufficient.
31 October 2024
Court granted a temporary injunction preventing eviction pending resolution of disputed land ownership despite res judicata concerns.
Land law – interim injunction – requirements for temporary injunction (prima facie case, irreparable harm, balance of convenience); res judicata and rights in rem – effect on interlocutory relief; preservation of status quo pending determination of main suit.
31 October 2024
Unregistered sale proved by documents and admissions defeats later unproven mortgage; appellants declared owners.
Land law – proof of ownership – weight of documentary evidence (sale agreements) and witness testimony – effect of admissions in pleadings; Registration of mortgages – requirement of documentary proof/official search and valuation by registered valuer; Priority disputes between unregistered sale and alleged registered mortgage when mortgagee fails to prove registration and valuation.
31 October 2024
31 October 2024
31 October 2024
Uninterrupted possession and corroborative evidence established appellant's ownership over an unproven earlier title.
Land law – ownership dispute – burden of proof on balance of probabilities – possession and development as proof of title; evaluation of witness evidence and authenticity of sale agreements; review of DLHT's evidence assessment.
31 October 2024
Application challenging Bill of Costs struck out as underlying suit was withdrawn with leave to refile, not finally determined.
Advocate Remuneration Order (G.N. No. 264 of 2015) – section 7(1),(2) – challenge to Bill of Costs – competence where underlying suit withdrawn with leave to refile; Civil procedure – withdrawal with leave to refile – no final decision to support costs award; Relief – inappropriate to maintain costs challenge absent final determination; striking out application.
31 October 2024
Application to set aside ex parte judgment dismissed as time-barred for being filed beyond the extended period.
Civil procedure – Application to set aside ex parte judgment – limitation period and time bar. Law of Limitation Act (First Schedule, Part III, item 21) – applicability to applications where no period provided. Civil Procedure Code s.93 – extension of time – discretionary relief requiring good cause; not to be open-ended. Preliminary objections – procedural compliance (attachment of prior order) vs. merits of time-bar objection.
31 October 2024
Applicant entitled to unpaid rent and damages where respondent breached lease; deed of compromise was partial, not full settlement.
Land law – House lease – obligation to yield premises in good and tenantable repair; Interpretation of Deed of Compromise – partial compromise vs full settlement; Evidence and pleadings – appellate re‑evaluation where tribunal misconstrued facts; Reliefs – damages for holding over/mesne profits and general damages; Costs.
31 October 2024
Extension of time granted to appeal an ex‑parte judgment; appeal under s.70(2) CPC competent without prior setting aside.
Land — Extension of time to appeal — Appeal against ex‑parte judgment under s.70(2) CPC — Competence to appeal without setting aside — Illegality (non‑service, non‑notification, issues outside pleadings) as sufficient cause to extend time.
31 October 2024
31 October 2024
An applicant’s advanced age, lay status and financial hardship may constitute good cause to extend time to file an appeal.
Land law – Extension of time to appeal – "Good cause" as a relative concept – Being a layperson, advanced age and financial difficulty may justify enlargement of time – Applicant’s duty to provide relevant material to account for delay – Section 41(2) Land Disputes Courts Act.
31 October 2024
Dismissal due to non-compliance with High Court order and addressing time limitation jurisdiction properly.
Land law - Non-compliance with High Court order - Time-barred application - Determination based on jurisdictional issue.
31 October 2024
Appellant failed to prove full payment; tribunal properly addressed unpaid balance and deed of gift, appeal dismissed with costs.
Evidence — burden of proof under section 110(1) Evidence Act — claimant must prove full payment to establish ownership. Civil procedure — tribunal's duty to address issues raised in evidence — not suo motu when matter arises in examination/cross-examination. Land law — deed of gift as title evidence — effect on competing purchase claim. Appellate review — deference to trial tribunal's evaluation of witness demeanour and evidence.
31 October 2024
Revision was premature; party must first apply to set aside the Tribunal’s absent-party order and exhaust remedies.
Civil procedure – Revision – Prematurity – Revisional powers should not be invoked where statutory remedies exist and have not been exhausted; Regulation 11(1)(c) and (2) (Land Disputes Courts Regulations, 2003) provides procedure to set aside Tribunal orders made in absence of a party. Supervisory powers – Section 43(1) Land Disputes Act – to be exercised cautiously where alternative remedies remain available.
31 October 2024
Application challenging land attachment struck out for incurably defective and unsigned joint affidavit.
Civil procedure – Order XXI Rule 57(1) & Rule 59 CPC – supporting affidavit must contain proper verification, jurat and signatures – discrepancy in applicant lists and unsigned jurat render affidavit incurably defective – preliminary objection – application struck out with costs.
31 October 2024
A trustee cannot sue in personal capacity over property vested in a registered body corporate of trustees.
Trustees Incorporation Act (Cap 318) – effect of incorporation: registered trustees become a body corporate with power to sue and be sued; Locus standi – individual trustee cannot sue in personal capacity over property vested in the registered trustee body; Civil Procedure – Order XXX Rule 2 (Cap 33): where there are several trustees they must be parties to the suit; Validity of authorization – nomination or internal authorization does not confer capacity to sue in personal name where law vests rights in the corporate trustee.
30 October 2024
The applicant granted leave to produce belated documents after showing good cause; costs in the course.
Civil Procedure — Order XIII Rule 2 — belated production of documents — good cause must be shown; Pre-Trial Conference — reservation of right to file additional documents; Scheduling orders — no departure required where only leave to produce documents is sought.
30 October 2024
30 October 2024
Extension of time granted where credible medical evidence and nursing duties justified delay in filing notice of appeal.
Land law – extension of time to file notice of appeal – medical incapacity and nursing duties as sufficient cause; credibility of medical annexures; discretion to grant limited extension and refuse costs.
30 October 2024
Non-joinder of sellers and the municipal land authority in a land suit rendered the Tribunal’s proceedings void and warranted quashing.
Land law — Necessary parties — Sellers of disputed land and local land authority must be joined; Non-joinder of necessary parties in land disputes is fatal and renders proceedings null; Trial Tribunal cannot pass an effective, executable decree in absence of necessary parties; Revisionary powers under s.43(1) & (2) Land Disputes Courts Act used to nullify and quash proceedings.
30 October 2024
Appellant failed to prove purchase or vendor capacity; written sale agreement and material witnesses were required.
Land law – disposition of land requires written contract or memorandum (Land Act s.64(1)). Evidence – burden of proof s.110(1); failure to call material witnesses permits adverse inference (Hemedi Saidi v Mbilu). Documentary proof – bank pay-in slips insufficient where purpose and account ownership unproven. Capacity – sale by alleged administratrix requires proof of letters of administration.
30 October 2024
Applicant failed to prove respondents disobeyed an ex parte status quo order due to lack of proof of service and unclear evidence.
Civil procedure – Order VII Rule 21 and Section 95 CPC – application for declaration and punitive orders for alleged breach of status quo ante; service of ex parte orders and burden of proof. Evidence – insufficiency of photographic and video evidence to establish timing of demolition or effective service. Interim relief – status quo ante granted ex parte requires proof of service before contempt or punitive relief can be imposed.
30 October 2024
Appellant failed to prove ownership, boundaries or extent of trespass; appeal dismissed for lack of proof.
Land dispute – ownership and trespass – onus of proof under section 110 Evidence Act – party alleging ownership must prove size/boundaries to establish trespass. Evidence – parties bound by pleadings; contradictions in pleaded facts undermine proof. Assessors – opinions are advisory (Land Disputes Courts Act s.24); the chairman must consider but is not bound. Evidence weight – number of witnesses irrelevant; quality and consistency determine probative value (Evidence Act s.143; Hemedi Saidi).
30 October 2024
30 October 2024
Applicant failed to show good cause for delay; extension of time to file appeal denied with costs.
Extension of time – requirement to show good cause and account for each day of delay. Failure to pay court fees – not a sufficient ground for extension absent evidence of seeking waiver. Sickness/hospitalization – may be good cause if it prevented prompt action; applicant must prove causation and account for delay.
30 October 2024
High Court suit struck out as res-subjudice and abuse of process because an overlapping land dispute is pending before the DLHT.
Civil procedure – Res subjudice (section 8 CPC) – Suit dismissed where matter directly and substantially in issue is pending before District Land and Housing Tribunal. Abuse of process – Parallel proceedings and multiplicity of suits concerning same unsurveyed land may be struck out. Counterclaim treated as cross-suit – parties and subject matter overlap require consolidation or amendment at tribunal. Remedies – withdraw and refile before competent court after valuation; Order VIII r.10, Order XXIII r.1 referenced.
30 October 2024
Application to set aside dismissal filed after 30-day limitation is mandatorily dismissed under the Law of Limitation Act.
Civil procedure – Setting aside dismissal for want of prosecution – Limitation period – Item 4 Part III Schedule to the Law of Limitation Act prescribes 30 days. Limitation law – Section 3(1) Law of Limitation Act – Mandatory dismissal of proceedings instituted after prescribed period. Procedural remedy – Strike out versus dismissal – Limitation Act’s mandatory dismissal precludes striking out as alternative in this context.
30 October 2024
Proceedings were nullified because the suit failed to describe and identify the subject land as required by law.
Land law — Pleadings — Description of immovable property — Order VII Rule 3 CPC — Suit must sufficiently identify land; failure to describe subject matter renders proceedings null and void; High Court’s revisionary powers under s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act.
30 October 2024
Size and locality alone do not suffice; immovable property must be specifically described by boundaries or title number.
Land law — Description of immovable property — Order VII Rule 3 CPC — Boundaries/demarcation required — Blanket description insufficient — Overriding-objective principle cannot cure substantive identification defect — Revision under s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act — Nullity, quashing and setting aside of proceedings.
30 October 2024
Blanket descriptions of land (location and size without boundaries) are insufficient; proceedings quashed for failure to identify the property.
Land law — Pleading requirements for immovable property — Plaints must describe property sufficiently to identify it (Order VII r.3 CPC) — Blanket descriptions (location and acreage only) are insufficient — Boundaries/demarcation required — Defect not cured by overriding objective — Revisional power under s.43 LDCA to nullify proceedings.
30 October 2024
Failure to join land-authority necessary parties rendered the tribunal's proceedings null and void.
Land law – necessary parties – non-joinder of land authorities where competing Certificates of Title are relied upon; Court’s duty to join necessary parties suo motu; Revisionary powers under s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act; Proceedings and decrees rendered null and void by failure to join grantor authorities.
30 October 2024
Appeal quashed because necessary land authorities were not joined where competing Certificates of Title were relied upon.
Land law – title disputes where competing Certificates of Title exist – necessity to join land authorities; Civil procedure – joinder of necessary parties; High Court revisional power under s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act to nullify proceedings conducted without necessary parties.
30 October 2024
Extension of time granted where alleged illegality and lack of prior knowledge justified revisional application.
Limitation law – extension of time under s.14 Law of Limitation Act – discretion to grant for reasonable/sufficient cause. Civil procedure – revision – non-joinder of necessary parties and denial of hearing (illegality) as ground for extension. Evidence – knowledge of proceedings and accounting for delay; post-judgment material insufficient to prove prior awareness.
30 October 2024
Applicant failed to account for delay and alleged illegality was not apparent on the face of the record; extension refused.
Extension of time — Law of Limitation Act s.14(1) — sufficient cause — must account for entire delay — illegality ground requires illegality apparent on face of record — dismissal for non-appearance and want of prosecution — Lyamuya; Bushiri; Valambhia; Ngao Godwin Losero.
30 October 2024
Proceedings were nullified because pleadings failed to identify the disputed land as required by law.
Land law – pleadings – description of immovable property – Order VII Rule 3 CPC – requirement to identify property – failure to identify renders proceedings null and void – competence of tribunal – revision under s.43 Land Disputes Courts Act.
30 October 2024
Mediated lease settlement entered as consent judgment fixing construction-cost recovery, rent terms, prepayment and possession conditions.
Land law – lease dispute – mediated settlement recorded as consent judgment – recovery of construction costs from rentable space – rent calculation in USD with specified exchange rate – prepayment and early vacation provisions – enforcement and costs.
30 October 2024
Applicant failed to account for delay or show sufficient cause; extension of time denied with costs.
Limitation — extension of time — requirement to show sufficient cause and to account for every day of delay; financial hardship and advanced age not automatically sufficient — exceptional circumstances required; authorities: Bushiri, Lyamuya, Constantine Victor John.
29 October 2024
Failure to serve a reference within seven days under the Advocates Remuneration Order renders the reference incompetent.
Advocates Remuneration Order (GN. No. 263 of 2015) – Order 7(1)-(4) – reference to a judge – service of copies within seven days – computation of time – endorsement by Registry Officer suffices for commencement of service period – failure to serve within prescribed time renders reference incompetent and liable to be struck out.
29 October 2024
Late service beyond seven days from filing under Order 7(3) rendered the applicant's reference incompetent and it was struck out.
Advocates Remuneration Order (GN No. 263 of 2015) – Order 7(1)–(4) – Service of reference – Seven‑day service requirement counted from filing/registry endorsement date – Failure to effect timely service renders reference incompetent.
29 October 2024
Appellant failed to show sufficient cause; non‑service at delivery date is not automatically jurisdictional and appeal is dismissed.
Land law — extension of time to apply to set aside ex‑parte judgment — sufficiency of cause; service of summons — non‑service on date of delivery of ex‑parte judgment and jurisdiction; effect of failure to reply to counter‑affidavit (concession); tribunal's reliance on pleaded facts and court record.
29 October 2024
29 October 2024
Proceedings against an entity without legal personality are incompetent and the resulting judgment must be quashed.
Land law — Civil procedure — Capacity to sue — Proceedings instituted against a non-existent entity lacking legal personality are incompetent and render judgment void; revision under s.43 of the Land Disputes Courts Act.
29 October 2024
A non-existent leadership body lacks capacity to be sued; proceedings against it are void and were quashed.
Civil procedure – Capacity to sue – Legal personality of associations/leadership groups – A group without juristic personality cannot sue or be sued; joining such a party renders proceedings void. Land Disputes Courts Act s.43 – Revision powers – Illegality apparent on the face of the record permits revision, quashing and setting aside of tribunal proceedings. Procedural competence – Joinder of non-existent party – fatal jurisdictional defect.
29 October 2024
Where costs are withheld after a successful preliminary objection, the court must give written reasons; failure is fatal and costs may be awarded.
Civil procedure – costs – discretion to award costs under section 30 CPC – requirement to state reasons where costs do not follow the event – withholding costs without reasons a fatal irregularity; preliminary objection – effect of mediation certificate omission on costs entitlement.
29 October 2024
28 October 2024
The plaintiffs’ trespass claim accrued on the 2020 invasion; suit filed in 2024 was time-barred.
Limitation law – accrual of cause of action – trespass (re-survey) – three-year limitation for torts – discovery rule and knowledge of claim – requirement to plead exemption from limitation (CPC s.6).
28 October 2024
Extension of time granted because an apparent illegality on the record justified late lodging of the notice of appeal.
Extension of time – Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.11(1) – good cause – illegality apparent on face of record – Devram Valambhia principle – Lyamuya factors – admissibility/weight of TRA property rate demand note (Exhibit P2) vis-à-vis title deed/certificate of ownership.
28 October 2024