بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

المحكمة العليا

القضاة:

سعادة السيد / جـون وول ماكيــج  قاضي المحكمة العليا  رئيساً

سعادة السيد / أحمد البشير محمد الهادي  قاضي المحكمة العليا   عضواً

سعادة السيد / عبد الله الفاضل عيسـى   قاضي المحكمة العليا   عضواً

الأطراف:

نبويه محمد دياب                                                       الطاعنة

// ضد //

الفضل الفكي أبوفلا                                              المطعون ضده

الرقم م ع/ط م/9/2003م

قانون تسوية الأراضي وتسجيلها لسنة 1925م – تعديل السجل – المادة (54) من القانون

المبدأ:

1- عندما تسجل الأرض بعقد ما بين الحكومة والمستفيد يخرج الأمر من ولاية سلطات الأراضي فيما يتعلق بتعديل السجل الذي لا يعدل إلا بحكم قضائي أو بالاتفاق

2- عندما يتم التسجيل لا يجوز إلغاؤه إدارياً

الحكــم

JUDGE: JOHN WUOL MAKEC

Date: 1912003

This is an appeal submitted by the applicant/2nd Defendant Nubawiya Mohammed Diab against the decision of Administrative Court in Bhari, which dismissed the objection, he had raised against administrative act

The summary of the facts of this case are as follows:-

The dispute in this suit is over the ownership of plot No410Q16 Bhari In fact, respondent/plaintiff, El Fadhil El Daki is the registered owner of this plot He is in possession of search certificate for it Prior to registration of this plot in respondents name, he had been in possession of it since 1979 When the replanning of the area was subsequently made, this plot was allotted to him with an area of 888 sq and it was given No410 Q 16On 15111997 respondent and the Government signed the lease or legal contract of allotment of the said land to him

However, the applicant/2nd Defendant claimed, before land authorities that a portion of his land with an area of 256   ( 32× 8 sqm ) sq m had been added to respondent’s plot No410 The land Authority decided to retract from the contract and with drew the lease document and search certificate

After exhaustion of all administrative remedies available to him the respondent/ plaintiff submitted his objection to the Administrative Court As stated before the administrative act was quashed The second defendant then raised this appeal against that decision She claims in her application that during the re-plainning, part of the land which had remained in her long peaceable and open possession was added to the respondent and this was rightly restored to her when she complained to land authorities She requests this court to quash the decision of the Administrative Court and direct it to investigate the dispute to ascertain the truth

This application cannot succeed The respondent fulfilled all the necessary requirements to establish the ownership of No 410 Q16 The land , after the re-planning, was allotted to him He signed the lease or contract with the Government on 15111997 and he obtained search certificate, which is the evidence of ownership In fact the respondent’s title is supported by s54 of Land Settlement and Registration Act, 1925 Under this section ownership of land passes to a person by registration in his name Hence where there are conflicting claims over the ownership of land, the party who proves its registration in his name is entitled The land authorities had no jurisdiction to disturb the registration of plot No 410 Q16 Bhari in the respondent’s name

Hence, if my learned colleagues agree we confirm the decision of the administrative Court and reject the application with the costs

القاضي: أحمد البشير محمد الهادي

التاريخ: 22/1/2003م

بعد المداولة أوافق على حيثيات وقرار مذكرة الرأي الأول

القاضي: عبد الله الفاضل عيسى

التاريخ: 23/5/2003م

أوافق

Order:

We reject the application

JOHN WUOL MAKEC

SUPREME COURT JUDGE

2452003