S.H Amon apoteza jengo la ghorofa nane Kariakoo

Aombe mapitio ili mahakama iamuru waliokuwa wamiliki wa awali ambao wamerudishiwa umiliki wao wamlipe gharama za jengo au aruhusiwe kulivunja jengo lake ili wao wabaki na kiwanja chao.
Wamlipe vipi wakati kanunua eneo kimakosa na kawasababishia maisha ya tabu na mateso kwa kipindi cha miaka 20 (na wao wataomba fidia ya hasara waliyopata tangu kiwanja chao na nyumba yao kuvunjwa)
 
Milioni 105 angeweza kupata kiwanja njia ya Tegeta na kujenga kwa nafasi, mji unapanuka. Pole zake.
Kariakoo wakinga,waha n.k wamedhulumu sana nyumba za watu kimtindo huo, wanaingia mkataba na familia halafu mkataba ukibaki miaka kadhaa anakiuka baadhi ya vipengele vya mkataba kwa maksudi,wanafamilia mkienda mahakamani ndio imekula kwenu hiyo,kama mkataba ulibaki miaka 4 mchukue chenu basi kesi itaendeshwa hata miaka 10 na zaidi huku jamaa akiendelea kufanya biashara eneo lenu na nyie hata 100 ampati,hapo huyo amon asharudisha hela yake na faida kibao
 
Hivi kwa mfano akiamua kubomoa ghorofa lake anaruhusiwa ? Maana si ni mali yake, kama tu vyombo vya ndani ?
 
Mkuu nimerudiarudia kusoma kisa hiki naona kama kuna hila na udhulmati kwa wana familia warithi.

Kwa sababu, mbona sioni popote katika majumuisho ya majaji katika hukumu hiyo wakitaja namna gani wana familia hao walinufaika kwa kuiuza hiyo nyumba yao ya urithi kwa mtu mwingine na kuja kugeuka kutotambua zoezi lao hilo zima la uuzaji wa nyumba hiyo kwenye mnada wa hadhara!
 
Kuna kipindi kulikuwa na figisu figusu za watu kukopa hela kwa hati zisizozao yaani dudus ndio mkopaji lakini hati inapelekwa ya kwangu kama mkopaji na kwa vigezo vya bank unakuta sina hata shughuli ya kueleweka ambayo inaonyesha mzunguuko wa fedha. Nyumba inauzwa na mahakama, anaibuka mke kusema hakushirikishwa wakati mumewe akikopa na hajaona chochote kuhusu huo mkopo
 
Mmoja ana jengo mwingine ana uwanja wakae tu chini waungane wafanye business plan jinsi ya kugawana mapato
Bahati mbaya kiwanja ndicho kinaitambulisha nyumba hivyo mwenye kiwanja akisharejeshewa vyote vilivyomo ni vyake japokuwa kiuhalisia sio vyake, mfano tuache isssue ya hilo ghorofa, nije nimwage mchanga, kokoto na matofari kwenye kiwanja chako yaani hapo moja kwa moja hivyo vitu vinakuwa vyako
 
kwa maoni yangu hii hasara inapaswa ilipwe na Serikali

S.H.Amon alinunua Nyumba iliyouzwa kwa Amri ya Mahakama ya Hakimu Mkazi Kisutu

kama Raia mwema hanna sababu ya kutia wasiwasi nyumba iliyouzwa kwa amri ya Mahakama …haikuwa amri ya Bank so kama upotoshaji basi mahakama ya Kisutu ndio ilipotosha na hasara lazima iibebe
 
Niliwahi kuonana na mmoja wa wanafamilia ambaye ni msimamizi wa mirathi, mawakili wa sh.Amon walikuwa wakimweleza ukweli hana haki lakini alikuwa anawaambia mbele ya pesa kuna haki? Alikuwa akihonga kuchelewesha kesi lakini hawakukata tamaa hatimaye haki imepatikana.
 
Inawezekana ndugu wenyewe walusuka hilo dili

Tatizo la ngozi nyeusi akipata pesa hudharau wasomi kisa tu wasomi pesa hawana kama wao!! Wakati wanajua vitu kibao zikiwemo.vya kisheria
Hupo sahihi huyu mzee namfahamu vizuri sana na nimeshafanya naye kazi, KWANZA,hataki ushauri na ana dharau sana alafu ni mtu wa dhuruma sana.
 
Bank watamlipa fidia akifungua shauri.
Mahakama na serikali havihusiani na mahakama ya kisutu Haina amri ya mwisho.
 
Unaweka pingamizi taratibu za mnada zinaendelea, nusura nipoteze nyumba, hakimu anawaambia madalali ni busara kusitisha mnada
 
Nani kakwambia jamaa akiamua anaweza akavunja akachukua material zake za ujenzi usikariri akabaki kumuachia jamaa kiwanja chake
The Court of Appeal said in its recent decision that Amon bought the house while aware that the property was until then jointly owned by Tatu and her relatives.

“The second respondent (Amon) having purchased the property without prior inquiry into the extent of the title of the judgment debtor (Tatu) on the suit property, cannot qualify as a bonafide.

“This is because in the circumstances of this case, any reasonable man would have expected the second respondent to (S.H. Amon Enterprises), before purchasing the suit property, inquire and find out in the relevant authorities what interests, if any, the said fourth respondent (Tatu)’s relatives had in the suit property.

“Her unreasonable omission to make an inquiry, put her to constructive notice or imputed notice of the appellant’s ownership interests on the suit property.
The court rejected Mr Amon’s complaint that he has invested huge amount of money on the property unworthy of being considered.

“Since it is clear from the record that she had been aware of the dispute on the property right from the beginning, whatever investment she injected on the suit property, was at her own risk,” said Judges Mwanaisha Kwariko, Issa Maige and Abraham Mwampashi.

They went on: “We cannot order demolition of the of the current buildings n the suit property as we see nothing wrong with the building itself. In any event, such order will not benefit either of the parties and it will have adverse effects to the national economy".
 
Sheria ni msala...
 
Huyu h Amon ndio h maana aliuza nyumba pale sinza d kijiweni kwa mama bite muuza gogo karibu na havad hotel
 
Jamani mambo ya ardhi hasa mijini ni shida sana
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…