Khatijabi v Samji and Others (Civil Appeal No. 60 of 1955)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
A testator who was a member of the Khoja Shia Ismaili Muslim community but not a 'native' as defined by the Land Ordinance could not dispose of property by way of wakf under Mohammedan law. English law applied, which does not permit separate dispositions of land and a house permanently affixed to it. The testator's attempt to dispose separately of the building and the land failed, resulting in intestacy.
Outcome
Second trust declared invalid; intestacy resulted; estate to be distributed according to Hindu law of the Mayukha school
Facts
Karmali Murji Sakarani, a member of the Khoja Shia Ismaili Muslim community domiciled in Tanganyika, died in 1929. His will purported to create two trusts over freehold land in Dar es Salaam with a building comprising six shops and rooms. The first trust (a wakf for his daughter and her descendants) was set aside by the High Court as infringing the law against perpetuities. The second trust directed that income from rent of four shops be paid to three named persons for life, with surplus to indigent community members. The appellant, the testator's daughter, sought a declaration that both trusts were invalid and that the property be distributed according to Hindu law governing intestacy. The High Court refused the order as to the second trust. The testator's will appeared to dispose separately of the building and the land on which it stood.
Issues
- Whether a testator not classified as a 'native' under the Land (Law of Property and Conveyancing) Ordinance could validly create a wakf trust under Mohammedan law.
- Whether land and a house standing thereon could be the subject of separate dispositions under Tanganyika law.
- Whether the second trust created by the will was valid.
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Decree of the High Court amended to include reference to the second trust property in paragraph (1).
- Paragraph (2) of the decree deleted and paragraph (3) renumbered as (2).
- Costs of the appeal to be paid out of the estate.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
- Land (Law of Property and Conveyancing) Ordinance (Cap. 114) s.2
- Land (Law of Property and Conveyancing) Ordinance (Cap. 114) s.15
- Marriage, Divorce and Succession (Non-Christian Asiatics) Ordinance (Cap. 112) s.6
- Marriage, Divorce and Succession (Non-Christian Asiatics) Ordinance (Cap. 112) s.8
Cases cited (1)
- Wakf Commissioner of the Colony and Protectorate of Kenya v Alimohamed Ali Nahdi (1951) 18 EACA 86
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.