Teofrida v. Kanisius (PC) Civ. App. 146-D-69; 13/1/71 Makame J.

 

Teofrida v. Kanisius  (PC) Civ. App. 146-D-69; 13/1/71 Makame J.

          The respondent filed a suit in the primary court claiming paternity of a child. The court found that he was the father of the child but then stated that he could legitimize the child when it attained seven years, depending on the child’s decision.

                        Held:  (1) “I think this order stems from confusing the paternity of the child with its custody. Section 181B of Law of Persons (G.N.279 of 1963) provides for the legitimization of a child bornin such circumstances before the child is weaned. The respondent filed a suit a mere three months after the birth so he was clearly within time. Custody and maintenance are different from the issue of paternity.  It is inconceivable that the child should be asked to decide who her pater is.  “Similarly, the District Magistrate said the respondent should legitimize the child if the appellant agrees. The appellant might have agreed to the legitimization of the child by the respondent if she had agreed that the respondent was the pater. The whole point is that she did not agree, and that is why they came to court. The paternity of the child respondent may legitimize the child as of right and not subject to the wishes of the appellant. (3) “I therefore order that if the respondent wishes he may legitimize his child by offering to the appellant’s father the customary Shs.100/= not later than 15^th of April 1971, G.N.279 having been made applicable to the subjects of the Songea District Council by G.N.476 of 1963, and “Songea District Council” being defined by G.N.280 of 1963 as being the Songea District and Mbinga District.”  (4) Appeal dismissed.