UDA Tenants Appeal Against Order to Vacate | JamiiForums | The Home of Great Thinkers

Dismiss Notice
You are browsing this site as a guest. It takes 2 minutes to CREATE AN ACCOUNT and less than 1 minute to LOGIN

UDA Tenants Appeal Against Order to Vacate

Discussion in 'Jukwaa la Siasa' started by EMT, May 9, 2012.

  1. EMT

    EMT JF-Expert Member

    May 9, 2012
    Joined: Jan 13, 2010
    Messages: 14,464
    Likes Received: 865
    Trophy Points: 280
    TENANTS of premises owned by a Dar es Salaam transport company (UDA) have appealed to the High Court, Land Division against a ruling issued by Temeke District Housing Tribunal, which limits the two sides' relationship to a tenant and landlord only.

    In a Notice of Appeal dated April 4 this year, the applicants claim that the new UDA management is being probed by Parliament and the Controller and Auditor General (CAG). They are wondering therefore as to why, even before the outcome of the probe, UDA is "rushing" to terminate their tenancy.

    The court had also ruled that it was not up to the tenants to question whether UDA could terminate the lease agreement before a report on its legality was out.In the appeal, however, the tenants are asking for the intervention of the registrar against the Housing Tribunal ruling, under Section 44 of the Land Dispute Courts Act, on UDA's legality only.

    The ruling which was issued on March 19 by the Tribunal Chairman Mr Joseph Kaare read in part: "The only relationship between applicants and respondent is that of a landlord and tenant. UDA's sale of shares or management does not form part of the relationship. It is improper for the applicants to question it," said Mr Kaare.

    According to Mr Kaare, as far as the case is concerned, it makes no difference whether UDA's sale of shares is under investigation or not. Earlier, tenants filed an application to oppose their expulsion from UDA compound, giving three grounds, namely questioning the legitimate ownership and status of the management of UDA, for which a parliamentary committee report was yet to issue a report.

    They had also argued that the eviction notice should have been issued three months in advance. The new investor is also said to have intention to evict the tenants so he could use the open space to operate a dry port, an activity currently undertaken by Koru Freight.