Automated Summary
Key Facts
The Applicant (Obed Manjoni) and Respondent (George Kapila) share a boundary for their plots (980 and 981) in Chilanga, both having been allocated land by Kafue District Council in 2002. The Surveyor General identified inconsistencies in the survey diagrams, particularly for Plot 981, recommending resurveying and replanning. The Court determined that the boundary dispute requires the Surveyor General's intervention and ordered them to resurvey both plots with due consideration to existing structures. The Court found no legal issue to resolve and directed the parties to bear their own costs.
Issues
The primary legal issue was whether the Respondent (George Kapila) had encroached on the Applicant's (Obed Manjoni) property (Plot 980) in Chilanga. The court determined that boundary disputes arose due to inconsistent survey diagrams for Plots 980, 981, and 982, with the Surveyor General recommending re-surveying to resolve the discrepancies.
Holdings
- Each party must bear their own costs.
- The court directed the Surveyor General to re-survey or replan Plots 980 and 981 to resolve boundary inconsistencies, considering existing structures. It concluded that the determination of boundaries does not give rise to a legal question and requires the intervention of the Surveyor General.
- Leave to appeal is hereby granted.
Remedies
- Leave to appeal is granted, allowing either party to pursue further legal action if desired.
- The Court ordered the Surveyor General to re-survey or replan Plots 980 and 981 to determine the correct boundaries, considering existing structures on the ground.
- Each party is required to bear their own costs associated with the legal proceedings.
Legal Principles
The court emphasized that boundary disputes requiring technical survey resolution fall under the jurisdiction of the Surveyor General rather than judicial intervention, applying the principle of separation of powers. It concluded that the Surveyor General's expertise is essential for determining land boundaries due to admitted inconsistencies in the survey diagrams.
Cited Statute
Land Survey Regulation
Judge Name
M. Mapani-Kawimbe
Passage Text
- The beacons shown to us, (labelled B1, B2 and B3 on sketch A1), by the owners are erroneous as they do not agree as is provided by Regulation 26 of the Land Survey Regulation. The area enclosed by these beacons is 1772 square metres instead of 651 square metres as per SR525/2002. The area is almost 3 times what it should be.
- I order and direct the Surveyor General to re-survey or replan Plots 980 and 981 so as to determine the boundaries. This should be done with due consideration to the existing structures on the ground.
- After carefully examining the evidence adduced, I find that there are inconsistencies in the survey diagrams for Plots 981 and 982. The Surveyor General is well aware of this fact and recommended the replanning of Plot 981, and re-surveying of Plot 981.