Pancras Elias v. Gretian Pancras and another (PC) Civ. App. 99-M-68, 13/8/68, Seaton J.
The shamba in question is divided into two parts, “A” and “B”. ‘A’ was bought by Pancras from a third pary. Part ‘B’ was inherited by Gretian, the son of Pancras, from his grand father. Pancras gave Part A to Gretian since ‘B’ was not enough for his needs. Later, Gretian sold both parts. Pancras claimed that they were clan shambas and that he had the right to redeem them.
Held: (following Garasiani Kabena Murefu and another v. Bushaija Luhirwa Vol. 4 Digest of Appeals from Local Courts p.3) (1) The court should demand strict proof of all the conditions under which a relative could redeem clan land since otherwise it would stultify the initiative and enterprise of purchasers of clan land. (2) Land bought from a third party is not clan land therefore there was no right to redeem Part A. (3) Proceedings to nullify a sale had to be started within 3 months from the time the relative first heard of the sale. There was no evidence as to whether the time limit had been exceeded or not in relation to part B and the case on that question was remitted to the primary court. (4) If the primary court finds that the time limit was exceeded, Pancras is entitled to receive from Gretian value of banana and coffee trees on Part B.
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.