Endoshi v. Lema (P. C.) Civ. App. 107-A-71; 30/10/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

Endoshi v. Lema (P. C.) Civ. App. 107-A-71; 30/10/71; Kwikima Ag. J.

Appellant successfully sued respondent in primary court for damages in trespass caused by respondent’s sheep which destroyed crops on appellant’s shamba. Damages awarded for 2 bags of peas which trial court found were destroyed. The district magistrate reduced the quantum of damages on the ground that seven sheep could not destroy pigeon peas worth Shs. 200/=.

Held: (1) “With great respect to the learned magistrate, the respondent did not base his appeal on that ground at all. And even if he had done so, the question was so broad and scientific that it would have been essential to call additional evidence from agricultural experts to testify how much each sheep can eat in a given time. So that when the learned magistrate ventured to find fault with the finding of the trial court, he was embarking upon speculation of the most dangerous type. It cannot be said either, that an appeal should be allowed on speculative considerations.’” (2) “As this court has very often repeated the best court to assess and fix damages is the trial court. Unless the quantum fixed can be shown to be so plainly unreasonable, an appeal court cannot and should be ill advised to take it upon itself to interfere. The amount of damages

            Is a fact best ascertainable by the trial court which is better equipped with facts and all the circumstances of the case. In this case the learned appeal magistrate reassessed the evidence in order to reverse the decision of the trial court. He did not point at any error on the part of the original court. He simply substituted its findings of facts with his own, thereby deflecting the course justice. How unwarranted interference should not therefore be allowed to stand and it s hereby set aside.” (3) “The original decision restored and confirmed.

            [Editors’ note:- See Case No. 420 infra].