Constantin Hamanya v. Elias Kayoza, (PC) Civ. App. 33-M-67, 27/1/68, Mustafa J.

Constantin Hamanya v. Elias Kayoza, (PC) Civ. App. 33-M-67, 27/1/68, Mustafa J.

Plaintiff was the successor in interest, by bequeath, to a shamba formerly owned by an old lady. Before her death, second defendant, also a descendant of the lady, had incurred a debt to first defender, which he had honored by permitting his creditor to pick 100 debes of coffee from the shamba. The lady learned of this arrangement, and gave her verbal approval. After her death, plaintiff sued both defendants, in Primary Court in the Bukoba District, for the value of the coffee removed from the shamba. However, he was unable to show how much had been picked before her death, and how much after.

            Held: (1) Plaintiff was not he owner of the shamba until after the lady’s death, and therefore has no right to the value of coffee removed from it during her life-time. (2)Plaintiff would be entitled to compensation for coffee picked subsequent to her death; however; without evidence as to the quantities picked before and after her death, his claim is “bad for uncertainty”. Plaintiff’s appeal dismissed.