Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Shabani Nasoro v. Rajabu Simba, (PC) Civ. App. 6-D-66; 26/7/67; Saidi, J.



Shabani Nasoro v. Rajabu Simba, (PC) Civ. App. 6-D-66; 26/7/67; Saidi, J.

Plaintiff claimed land which defendant occupied. It was conceded that plaintiff’s father originally owned the land but gave possession to defendant’s father. Plaintiff, however, claimed that the possession had been wrongful since the death of plaintiff’s father sometime “in the middle of the Second World War.” He also claimed a right to the crop from trees which his father had allegedly planted on the land. Plaintiff argued that the limitation period of 20 years was not a bar since there was not sufficient evidence to show that defendant had been in physical occupation without interruption for twenty years.

            Held; (1) The court has been reluctant to disturb persons who have occupied land and developed it over a long period. “(T)he respondent and his father have been in occupation of the land for a minimum of 18 years, which is quite a long time. It would be unfair to disturb their occupation ……” (2) For similar reasons, it would be unfair to give plaintiff a right to the crops even if his father planted the treas.

Post a Comment

0 Comments