Mbowe eviction legally okay, High Court decides

The High Court (Land Division) has dismissed an application by Chadema chairman Freeman Mbowe in which he opposed being removed from a city centre NHC building.

What you need to know:

  • Judge Sivangilwa Mwangesi reached the decision yesterday after he was satisfied that Mr Mbowe was legally evicted. However, Mr Mbowe’s advocate Peter Kibatala was not happy with the decision and expressed intention to appeal at the Court of Appeal

Dar es Salaam. The High Court (Land Division) has dismissed an application by Chadema chairman Freeman Mbowe in which he opposed being removed from a city centre NHC building.

Judge Sivangilwa Mwangesi reached the decision yesterday after he was satisfied that Mr Mbowe was legally evicted. However, Mr Mbowe’s advocate Peter Kibatala was not happy with the decision and expressed intention to appeal at the Court of Appeal.

According to him, they already filed a notice of appeal at the Land Division seeking to be provided with judgment and proceeding so as to file revision at the High Court. Along with the notice of appeal, Mr Kibatala also said that they have filed an application for injunction restraining NHC and its auctioneers not to sell the properties pending determination of the revision by the Court of Appeal.

On September 1, National Housing Corporation (NHC) auctioneers attached properties in the building that houses popular Bilicanas Club and Free Media Limited, the publisher of Tanzania Daima newspaper, both owned by Mr Mbowe following an occupancy dispute between the two sides. Mr Mbowe through his advocate, Mr Kibatala, filed the application at the Court seeking among other things, the court to order NHC and Foster Auctioneers and General Traders to restore him to the property.

According to Mr Kibatala, his client was illegally evicted from the building because the auctioneer sent by NHC was not registered and hence not recognised by the Registrar of the Court.

Mr Kibatala further submitted that the law was not followed during the eviction because his client was not served with a notice.