%20(18).png)
Masera Mwita v. Matiko Muhabe, (PC) Civ. App. 166-M-68, 14/10/68, Seaton J.
The respondent ran off with the appellant’s daughter without paying brideprice. The appellant later seized 7 head of cattle in the possession of the respondent, who now claims their return.
Held: The father of a bride is not entitled to seize cattle when the brideprice has not been paid, if there has been no agreement as to the amount of the brideprice. The cattle may in any case, be the property of other owners.
%20(10).png)
%20(28).png)
%20(18).png&description=Masera Mwita v. Matiko Muhabe, (PC) Civ. App. 166-M-68, 14/10/68, Seaton J.){kind=link}
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.