Kinyozi v. Bandawe (PC) Civ. App. 39-D-69; 29/6/70; Makame, Ag. J.

Kinyozi v. Bandawe (PC) Civ. App. 39-D-69; 29/6/70; Makame, Ag. J.

The parties were engaged to be married, but they did not marry. The child was born at the respondent’s village, and according to her this was after her two-year relationship with the appellant was over and after she had met the father of the child, one Jaffer. According to the appellant, she merely went home for the confinement, and they continued to associate after the child was born. There was ample evidence of some association, not necessarily sexual, after the child was born, and according to Mr. Mapezi, then Area Secretary, Lindi, the respondent did at one time say in his presence that the child was the appellant’s. But, as Mr. Mapezi pointed out, that was mentioned by the way; because it did not concern the problem he was called upon to resolve.

            Held: (1) “To me the problem is straightforward. It is not disputed that there was no Christian or Moslem marriage between the parties. The parties merely cohabited, but here was not even a customary marriage within the meaning of section 86 of Law of Persons, G. N. 279 of 1963.” (2) “Assuming the appellant fathered the child, he took no steps in accordance with the law to legitimize the child under section 181. With respect, therefore the district magistrate was right in holding that the child is that of the respondent and her relatives, in accordance with section 178.” (3) Appeal dismissed.