Shechambo v. Mbuli (PC) Civ. App. 120-D-70; 17/2/71; Hamlyn J.

 

Shechambo v. Mbuli (PC) Civ. App. 120-D-70; 17/2/71; Hamlyn J.

A sale of land was agreed to between the parties and the purchaser entered into possession; “he thereafter carried out some small improvements to the land but failed to pay the purchase-price or an part thereof. The seller therefore sued the purchaser for the land and not for the purchase-price and it would seem that this decision on the part of the purchaser was made in view of the great shortage of cultivated land in the area. The plot, it appears, adjoins the land of the seller and is separated there from by a small stream which shows the boundary. The District Court decided that, in view of the non-payment of the purchase-price of the land, the purchaser had failed to carry out his part of the bargain and that the whole agreement failed. The assessors were of similar opinion.

Held: (1) “It may be that this decision was based on the local law of the area where the land is situated and the District Court was careful to order that, when the seller re-took possession of the land under the Court Order, he should pay compensation to the purchaser for such improvements as he had made to the plot. I consider that this Court should not interfere with the decision of the District court, as it is probably based on local usage and it would therefore be wrong for me to apply other and totally foreign rules to the decision of this dispute.” (2) The District Court should proceed to assess the value of the improvements made by the appellant to the property and hereafter order the payment of such amount to him by the respondent. (3) Appeal dismissed.