Sukina v Kandari [2021] PGLLC 2; DC7055 (9 August 2021)

DC7055

PAPUA NEW GUINEA.

[IN THE DISTRICT COURTS OF JUSTICE

SITTING IN ITS LOCAL LAND COURT JURISDICTION]
LLC NO: 03 /2021.

In the matter of a Customary Land Dispute over Ownership of the Hegata Land at the Edge of Popondetta Town in Ijivitari District, Northern Province.

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:

NORAH SUKINA of Angoropa Clan
Complainant/Claimant.

AND:

CHRIS KANDARI of Angoropa Clan
Defendant/Claimant.

Popondetta: Michael W. Apie’e Chairman
Ezekiel Haera-Mediator
John Haenare-Mediator

2021: February 23^rd, March 09^th, 15^th ,16^th, May 6^th, 07^th, 11^th, 25^th and 27^th, June 11^th, July 06^th August 09^th.

Real Property-Customary Land Dispute. Patrilineal Society, Bequest of Land through Traditional Land Transfer Agreement to adopted daughter, pursuant to Formal Will. Validity of Land Transfer Agreement/Will.

Cases Cited:
Re James Allan Sannga, Deceased; Timereke v. Ferrie and Johns [1983] PNGLR 143

References:
Land Disputes Settlement Act (LDSA)
Wills Probate and Administration Act.

Representation;
Mrs. Norah Sukina ‘nee’ Kandari for herself
Mr. Chris Kandari for himself.

JUDGMENT.

1. Decision of the Local Land Court in Respect of the Land Dispute between the Parties over the concerned Portion of the Hegata Lands.
   
2. The Complainant Norah Sukina has the maiden name of Kandari because she was adopted and raised by late Gilchrist Kandari same as the Defendant and so for all intents as purposes she can be called as Norah Kandari-Sukina or Norah Sukina ‘nee’ Kandari or just Norah.
   
3. The Defendant Chris Kandari is also an adopted son to the Late Gilchrist Kandari and is the Adopted brother of the Complainant. He will be simply called Chris for purposes of this Decision.
   
4. They dispute the Relevant Portions of Hegata Land from and of their Late Father Estate.
   
5. This matter was referred on the Local Land Court after failure of Land Mediation(s) between the Parties on the 18/08/2020 and it ultimately came before the Local Land Court on the 23/02/21, with myself as Chairman and Messrs. Ezekiel Haera and John Haenare, as Land Mediators.
   
6. We are satisfied that we have the jurisdiction under section 26 of the Land Dispute Settlement Act (LDSA) to hear and determine the issue of ownership.
   
7. The Complainant called a total of Three (3) witnesses when hearing commenced on the 02/03/21, that is herself Norah, her Husband Mr. Ezekiel Sukina and her third Witness and Daughter Ms. Chelsie Sukina..
   
8. The Essence of their Individual evidences are as follows;
   

Norah Sukina ‘nee’ Kandari.

1. Her late Adoptive father Gilchrist Kandari adopted total of 4 children, Herself and Defendant Chris from his wife’s side and Napoleon and Windora from his side of the Family.
   
2. Before Gilchrist Kandari died, he bequeathed lands to his adopted Children as follows, he Allocated the Disputed Land at Hegata to the Complainant Norah and he allocated the Haera Land to Chris, and also showed them other traditional assets like Sago Palm groves to both herself and the Defendant.
   
3. He also gave his licensed Shot gun to Norah by transferring the License and Ownership to Norah’s husband Mr. Ezekiel Sukina.
   
4. She also recounted being told when still a young girl by the Late Gilchrist Kandari that the Disputed Land at Hegata was hers and that when she marries, she would remain on this Land with her husband and children.
   
5. When she met her husband in 1990, she told him this and later when her husband also came to her parent’s house he was also told this by her late father.
   
6. In September of 1995, the Late father came to the Lands Office and sought to transfer the Land to Norah’s Husband Ezekiel Sukina but was told by Lands officers that he can only transfer to his own children and so he sought to transfer to Norah.
   
7. Two Chiefs Mr. Alkin (Bahera) Paratapa of Paratapa Clan and Mr. Kingsley Pesarapa of Okaipa Clan were consulted and they both agreed and vouched for the fact that the Land belonged to Gilchrist Kandari.
   
8. These Elders elaborated that the Land was previously Paratapa Clan land but was given to Gilchrist Kandari himself and so he had the right to deal with it as he will.
   
9. After that the Land Officers told them how to draft the necessary documents and so was drafted by Ezekiel Sukina and when it was shown to the late Gilchrist Kandari, he agreed to its contents and they took the document to the Court House to show former Magistrate Mr. Leslie Asimba.
   
10. Mr. Asimba (Magistrate.) sighted the documents and told the clerk to invite them back, so on the 24^th of November 1995, the Complainant and her husband came back with her Father Gilchrist and his witness Alkin Paratapa to the Magistrates office wherein the Magistrate read the contents of the Land Transfer Agreement and explained it to Gilchrist Kandari and Alkin Paratapa.
    
11. Both Elders Gilchrist and Alkin agreed to the Contents that he (Gilchrist) wanted to give the Land to Norah and so they both endorsed the documents in front of the Magistrate.
    
12. At the time of the signing of this Land Transfer Agreement, Gilchrist was the Village Court Chairman for Kakandetta village Court and also a Land Mediator and he was in possession of all his mental faculties and was of a clear and sound mind when he deliberately transferred this Land to the Complainant.
    
13. In addition to that, the Complainants third child died in 2003 and during the moaning period (Haus Krai) the Community gathered and one Mr. Gilman Sirota, the Younger clan brother of late Gilchrist Kandari said to Late Gilchrist Kandari, ‘When the dead child is buried at Hegata, Norah and her husband will not leave Hegata or Northern Province’ and Norah’s Husband Ezekiel Sukina’s relatives even heard this.
    
14. In 2015, Late Gilchrist Kandari got sick and was cared for by the Complainant, whilst the Defendant Chris was away at his Third Wife’s village and when Gilchrist Died, Norah and her husband met all the expenses required to put the Old man to rest with no contributions from the Defendant.
    
15. After the burial in 2015 on the 10^th of March 2017, the Defendant wrote a Lengthy Eviction Notice to the Complainant and her husband and family as evidenced in her Filing (pp 27 onwards of her binder).
    
16. The Complainant further said that the Defendant is desperate to have full and unimpeded access to the Hegata Lands without the Complainants presence and he is resorting to violence and threats against the Complainants family toward that end.
    
17. Chris Kandari has three wives and many children and if this matter is not resolved, that might pose problems in the future for the complainant.
    
18. According to the Complainant, the Defendants intention is to sell off his allotted portions and take over Norah’s Bequeathed Land at Hegata for his Families sake.
    

Ezekiel Sukina. The husband stated as follows;

1. He met Norah in 1990 and came to Hegata, and her father Late Gilchrist Kandari told him that ‘If you marry my daughter, you will not pay bride-price as she is the only daughter I have, and also you will not take her to your place. You will remain at Hegata which I have promised to your wife’ He said ‘I agreed and so settled down at Hegata.’
   
2. In September of 1995, Gilchrist Kandari came to their house and told them to go to Lands Office to get the paperwork sorted out for Hegata lands, for him to transfer to Norah.
   
3. They enquired with Lands Office and were told to see Customary Lands Officers, and the Customary Lands Officers advised for the old man to do a ‘Will’ saying that he has given that land to Norah, and directed them how to do a will.
   
4. The Old man wanted to sign a will as he was not sure the ‘sons’ will leave Norah alone after he dies.
   
5. So the ‘Will’ was drafted to Customary Lands Office Specifications or advise and the old man agreed to sign it and so they took the documents to the Court house and gave it to the Clerk of Court to verify with the Magistrate.
   
6. The Magistrate verified the document and they were invited back on the 24^th of November 1995 and the Old man and his witness Alkin Paratapa signed it before Magistrate Mr. Leslie Asimba who is also an Oro-kaiva man so he communicated with the Old man and his witness Alkin fully before they signed and he also signed.
   
7. Alkin could only put an ‘x’ as he was illiterate and the Old man Gilchrist Kandari was at the time serving as Village Court Chairman and so was of sound mind retaining all his mental faculties when he signed this will and Land Transfer.
   
8. In 2010 and onwards Chris began to create issues for the Complainant and her family including the longwinded Eviction Notice of 10/03/17.
   
9. Later when Norah told him (Chris) that the Old man had transferred the Land to her, he said ‘I revoke that transfer and the old mans will’ and Norah said ’You cannot change it’ but Chris insisted and so a summons was issued by Norah against the Defendant but Magistrates referred it to Customary Lands Office and Customary Lands Office affirmed the Transfer Agreement again, saying ‘it is a will and no one can change it.’
   
10. After going to the Police they also went to the Public Curators officers who affirmed the Transfer Agreement as a Binding Will and Document, and so the Land was to remain with Norah, but Chris was still not satisfied.
    
11. So ‘we resolve to take it to the Land Court and here we are’ said Mr. Ezekiel Sukina.
    
12. Apart from the Hegata Land, the Old man also gave a Sago Grove to Norah at Hetune and also more personally, he gave and transferred his Licensed Shot gun and license to Norah and Ezekiel Sukina. Mr. Sukina holds this Firearm and License to this date.
    
13. He gave traditional attires to Napoleon, and gave The Haera Land to Chris but he confided to Ezekiel Sukina that he could not/did not trust Defendant with his Lands.
    
14. All in all, the Old man was very fair to all his children, even to Chis the Defendant, according to Ezekiel Sukina.
    

Chelsie Sukina. Complainants second Daughter.

1. She recalled the old man telling her from time to time when she was growing up, that the Hegata Land was her mother’s land.
   
2. She also recalled that in 2015 the old man was very sick and in hospital so she was called back to Popondetta from Bougainville and when she arrived in Popondetta sometime in November, the old man was happy to see her and he reiterated that the Hegata Land was theirs, and also he said ‘If you get married, live on the Land!’
   
3. Two days later he died.
   

9. Apart from the Oral Component of her evidence noted above, the Complainant also filed documentary evidences extensively and the following is noted;
   
   1. Bounded volume of Documents with 37 pages relied on by the Complainant including the Land Transfer Agreement at pages 21 and 22.
      
   2. The Final Submissions of Norah dated 20/05/21.
      
10. The Defendant Chris Kandari’s case consisted primarily of his own and Abraham Sirota’s oral testimonies as follows;
    

Chris Kandari. Defendant.

1. He said that he was adopted three days after birth by the late Gilchrist Kandari, Nora was adopted when she was two years old.
   
2. He did not have documents to present but Claimed to stand as next of Kin of Late Gilchrist Kandari.
   
3. He rebutted the Complainant that he was not in Port Moresby in 1995, but rather was in Port Moresby for 8 months in 1981 and returned and that he was never aware of any Transfers of Land between Late Gilchrist and the Complainant, and claimed that ‘such claims’ of any transfer was all false.
   
4. He rebutted Ezekiel Sukina’s evidence also by stating that he was always here and never heard Late Gilchrist told Ezekiel Sukina not to pay Bride Price.
   
5. He also disagreed with Chelsie Sukina’s evidence that she was told by Gilchrist when she visited him at the hospital that ‘Hegata Land is your mothers Land.’ as Gilchrist was not eating or drinking at the time, so how could he say that?
   
6. Further, he also insisted that under Oro-Kaiva custom, when an in-law gave you land or valuable items, it is a big thing and in return you must show appreciation before he dies. In this case, the Defendant insisted that because they got the Land, they Looked down on Gilchrist and Alkin Paratapa. Gilchrist did the good thing to them and gave them the paper and Land, but after that, they never looked after the Land owner.
   
7. However, when questioned about what he just said above, he denied knowing of any Land Transfer Agreement, saying that he was here all along and should have known of any such agreements.
   
8. He also insisted in his oral testimony that since he was the first Adopted child, he considered himself the ‘Next of Kin’ to late Gilchrist Kandari.
   

Abraham Sirota. Defendants witness.

1. From Houpa Clan, but affiliated to Angaropa Clan in that his father Gilman Sirota is Gilchrist Kandari’s younger brother.
   
2. This witness insisted that Chris being the First adopted son/child of Late Gilchrist Kandari had almost Superior rights over the disputed Lands than the Complainant.
   
3. He also Raised doubts about the Transfer Process employed on 24/11/95 as copies were not given to others, and nobody else including clan members were involved or aware of such transfers.
   
4. I asked him point blank about the ‘Will’ or Land Transfer Agreement and He insisted that even a ‘Will’ or ‘Land Transfer Agreement’ was of insignificant consequence and must be overlooked in favor of recognizing Chris as the one with authority to deal with Gilchrist Kandari’s Estate and Lands.
   
5. He insisted that under Oro-kaiva Custom, women /females are Secondary to males when it came to inheritance of Lands, and so he insisted that as far as he was concerned, Norah must succumb to Chris’s authority and rights and very much subject herself to the Defendants mercy and they would decide whether or not she could stay.
   
6. On this point alone, I recall Ezekiel Sukina’s evidence when he said that ‘Gilchrist Kandari confided to him (Mr. Sukina) that he had a fear that if he died without transferring the Land, the sons would not allow Norah to remain on the Land!’ Just as predicted the Late Gilchrist Kandari!!
   

11. Apart from oral evidences above, the Defendant also filed his Final Submissions and made brief submissions on that on the 27/05/21.
    

EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 35 (1) (b) OF THE LDSA.

12. Mr. Merire Dubo was call on as Customary Lands Officer for the Northern Province to talk on the Land Transfer Agreement/Will which is the Subject of this Proceeding, pursuant to section 35(1) (b) of the LDSA, and the following is my transcript of his testimony in Court on the 11/05/21;
    
    1. He reported that he is a Program Manager in Customary Lands and his duties include all Transfer of Customary Lands.
       
    2. The document in issue was shown him and he recognize it as a Document purporting to relate to either the Sale of or Transfer of Customary Lands from one person to another.
       
    3. Since, the Land owner (Gilchrist Kandari) and a Community Leader (Alkin Paratapa) and Magistrate (Leslie Asimba) had all signed and Affixed a Court Stamp, for all intents and purposes the document was in Order.
       
    4. He was asked by The Complainant
       

Q: ‘If Father transferred Land to me, is it okay for the son(s) (Defendant) to remove the Land from me? And Mr. Dubo replied;

A: ‘Under Southern Region, man is head in Land Issues, so when father approved Land Transfer and gave his will, this document is current and still stands to date-The will is signed and sealed, it is valid and current.’

5. In Cross Examinations he was asked by the Defendant,
   

Q: ‘Under certain circumstances can land Transfer be revoked or cannot be enforceable?

A: When Father willed it, it can be changed only with the approval of the sister (Complainant) and you. She has authority because of this document.

Q: What if we find there is fraud or irregularities in such transfer agreement, can we revoke it, or what process can we follow ...to revoke it?

A: If it was Falsely done or Faked (. yes, it can be revoked), but this one is Officially done, witnessed and signed, this is final.

6. From the LLC Panel, he (Mr. M. Dubo) was asked;
   

Q: The Transfer Agreement before the Court, is it valid or okay?

A: Document is signed and Stamped, it is a Legal Document. If fraud was involved it can be changed, but this document is complete.

Q: So in your observations of the document, is it legal?

A: Yes, it is Legal!

From Mediator Ezekiel Haera;

Q: If decision is found in favor or the Complainant and later you found out there was fraud involved?

A: IF Evidence comes clear on that, the Transfer can be revoked......!

7. The evidence of Mr. Merire Dubo Ended on that note.
   

OBSERVATIONS.

13. In respect of this matter the Local Land Court Panel makes the following observations;
    
    1. The Traditional Land Tenure system in Oro-Kaiva Culture is Patriarchal and Land is normally passed through Male descent, as was amply stressed by the Defendant and his witness Abraham Sirota.
       
    2. However, noted exceptions to this general rule in both Oro-Kaiva and other Patriarchal Societies in Papua New Guinea are noted as that when there are only female descendants or also as a result of a direct Land Bequest to a female descendant or a daughter, be it a biological, adopted or even a nominated female relative or others.
       
    3. This Panel notes that Gilchrist Kandari is from the Angoropa Clan from Hegata, but the Disputed Land was bequeathed to him (Gilchrist) by the Original Land Owning Paratapa Clan also from Hegata village in Popondetta personally, and not as a bequeath or Land Transfer to the whole Angoropa Clan.
       
    4. This practically could have been the reason why a man of Late Gilchrist Kandari’s maturity, prominence, experience and wisdom in traditional affairs and Oro-Kaiva Land Tenure (Being a long service village Court Chairman and Land Mediator himself) decided to pass this Land onto his adoptive daughter without consulting the wider Angoropa Clan, knowing they had no say in the matter, or that they might unnecessarily object to such transfer.
       
    5. The Defendant and his witness also pressed that since Chris was the first Adopted Male son of Deceased Land Owner Gilchrist, he would take prominence in relation to the Traditional Estate of his and Norah’s Adoptive father.
       
    6. There are however generally accepted Exceptions to this general Rule such as indicated above in paragraph 10. iii, and also one such exception was pointed out by Mr. Merire Dubo in his evidence when vouching for the Land Transfer Will signed by the Late Gilchrist Kandari in favor of Norah, he said ‘Under Southern Region, man is head in Land Issues, so when father (Gilchrist Kandari) approved the Land Transfer and gave his Will, this document is current and still stands to date-The will is signed and sealed, it is valid and current.’
       
    7. The Local Land Court also note that the Late Gilchrist Kandari was largely ignore by The Defendant who was either away at work or living at his wife’s’ village and the Late Gilchrist Kandari was largely cared for up until his passing by the Complainant and her family.
       
    8. She also stressed that when Gilchrist passed, She and her husband Ezekiel Sukina catered for his funeral and burial at their own costs without much contributions from the Defendant.
       
    9. It is also important to note that according to the Defendant and his witness, Land in Oro-kaiva Culture would pass upon doing favors and special things for the Land Owner when he still lives. Caring for and putting up and funding a respectable Funeral and burial for the Land Owner and Adoptive Father in the opinion of this Tribunal is just such a favor! (In some cultures even just paying for the coffin or casket of the deceased can earn such person’s part of the deceased traditional Estate)
       
    10. The Defendant and his witness belittled the Land Transfer Agreement or Will by Gilchrist Kandari of 24^th November 1995 and said that ‘Chris Kandari will revoke that agreement and that Norah Sukina Should succumb to the whim and will of Chris Kandari as the ‘next of Kin’.
        
        1. This Panel Believe that the Late Gilchrist Kandari in his wisdom saw this coming as leading up to the Land Transfer Agreement, as Mr. Ezekiel Sukina reported in his evidence that ‘The Old man wanted to sign a will as he was not sure the ‘sons’ will leave Norah alone after he dies.’
           
        2. Chris has not adduced evidence to convince this panel that he was indeed appointed next of Kin by the Late Gilchrist Kandari, given that Any ‘Next of Kin title’ is normally given by the estate and not something that can be claimed by anyone.
    11. This Panel Also note that this Land Transfer Agreement is also preceded by another small but very significant gesture from the Late Gilchrist Kandari, and that is the Transfer of his Firearm License and Firearm (Shot gun) to Mr. Ezekiel Sukina, his son in Law.
        
    12. A Gun, though not a traditional Oro-Kaiva or for that matter Papua New Guinea implement is nowadays in Papua New Guinea, even an unlicensed firearm, a significant possession that denotes Prominence, Strength and station for the owner of such, a Licensed Gun more so. So why give to a son in law?
        
    13. Mr. Ezekiel Sukina told the Defendant in answer to cross examination when he was testifying, ‘I was given this gun by late Gilchrist, but if you had been around in the life of Late Gilchrist, you would have been give this.’ indicating that the Defendant was mostly absent at the relevant times from the life of the man that adopted him.
        
    14. This Land Transfer Agreement is also preceded by statements made reportedly to the Complainant by her Adoptive father that the Hegata Land will be hers when she was still young and also when she met and brought her husband home and was also reiterated to her children such as Chelsie Sukina even on his sick/death bed.
        
    15. The Defendant denies the validity of the Land Transfer Agreement in that it was either invalid since no one else knew of it, or that the Angoropa Clan did not approve it, or that such an Agreement was never made.
        
    16. Mr. Merire Dubo said that if fraud is discovered leading up to a Land Transfer Agreement or Will then it can be revoked.
        
    17. The Onus was on the Defendant, (As the one alleging the illegitimacy of the Land Transfer Agreement or Will between the Late Gilchrist Kandari and the Complainant dated 24/11/1995) to adduce the evidence to nullify and ultimately revoke this Land Transfer Agreement or Will. He has not done so!
        

LAND TRANSFER/WILL.

14. A Will according to the simplified definition in the Oxford Dictionary as a noun is ‘A Legal Document containing instructions as to what should be done with one’s money or property after one’s death.’ And as a Verb (Will something) Bequeath something to (someone) by the terms of ones will.
    
15. Normally when a Deceased ‘Dies Testate’ (dies with a Will) then the Last Will and Testament of such deceased person are given effect to and that is the end of the matter, but if a person ‘Dies Intestate’ or without a will, then any properties both real and corporeal or money or such can either be subject to Public Curator intervention or to other agreed and preferred means of devolutions or distributions and or settlement of the surviving estate like Customary Law of inheritance and descent.
    
16. In the Supreme Court Case of Re. James Allan Sanga (deceased) The Court, per Kidu CJ, Kapi DCJ and Andrew J, (as they then were) discussed in detail the connotations and implications of a ‘Will’ in Post- Independence Papua New Guinea.
    
17. In that case the Deceased Sannga died and various documents that were prepared for him became subjected to questions as to whether they could qualify sufficiently as his Last Will and Testament.
    
18. The Supreme Court in that case made the following observations that have a bearing on our mind relating to this case.
    
    1. The Will or documents purporting to be a Will must convey the full intentions of the person making such documents with the intentions that it take effect after his death.
       
    2. Kapi DCJ as he then was, noted that ‘For the purposed of section 43 of the Act, a will need not be a validly executed will under section 18 provided it is a document or documents having the distinct character and nature of a ‘Will’.
       
    3. Kidu CJ, as he then was, noted also that “. a will shall not be deemed invalid solely by reason of any defect or want of formality, or any failure to comply with the provisions of this act or any such law if it be proved that the Testator intended the will to be his last will and testimony and that intention is clear.”
       
19. The Complainant and her witness and husband Ezekiel Sukina reported that;
    
    1. When Late Gilchrist Kandari talked to the Land Office regarding his intentions over Hegata Lands, he was told to make a Will.
       
    2. Accordingly, the preparations and drafting and all other lead up culminated in the document titled ‘Customary Land Transfer Agreement’ dated 24^th November 1995, signed by the said Late Mr. Gilchrist Kandari before District Court Magistrate Mr. Leslie Asimba witness by one Alkin Paratapa from the Paratapa Clan from Popondetta.
       
    3. From 24^th November 1995 up till his death, Gilchrist Kandari never issued another Will and Testament or Codicil overriding or setting aside this Transfer Agreement or Will.
       
    4. Accordingly, Gilchrist Kandari went to his grave with this intention to leave the Disputed Land to the Complainant after his death.
       
    5. Therefore, according to the Complainant, the Public Curators officer endorsed this Agreement as well as the Lands Office, and Mr. Merire Dubo the Customary Lands Project Officer came to this Court himself and vouched for this Agreement.
       
20. The Defendant in his case contended that the ‘Transfer Agreement of 24/11/1995 is further invalid on the following points that;
    
    1. This so called agreement was not known by the wider Angaropa clans people and therefore invalid.
       
    2. That Angaropa Clan never approved such Transfer as so it must therefore be made voidable and everything revert back to his authority as the ‘Next of Kin’ to the Estate of Late Gilchrist Kandari.
       
    3. The Solution offered for the Complainant does not look promising as it is suggested that the Complainant should succumb to the Defendants Authority and the Defendant will decide if she could remain or not at Hegata.
       
21. The Local Land Court note as follows;
    
    1. In determining this case the Local Land Court is mindful of Section 68 Application of Custom and Section 69 of the Land Disputes Settlement Act to decide all matters before it in accordance with substantial justice.
       
    2. The Attitude taken here by the Defendant gives credence to the Complainants and her witnesses contention that Gilchrist Kandari decided to transfer the Land because he did not trust the Defendant and others to be fair to the Complainant.
       
    3. The Contention that the Hegata Lands could not be transferred without Angoropa Clan authority is not a valid argument as it is not Angoropa Clan Land but Paratapa Clan Land given to the Late Gilchrist Kandari in his personal capacity and not a Clan Bequest to Angoropa Clan by Paratapa Clan. Angoropa Clan therefore has no claim over the Hegata Land subject of this Dispute!
       
    4. This Local Land Court Panel notes that a man of Gilchrist Kandari’s experience, maturity and wisdom catered for his adopted daughter by bequeathing to her a Land that could not be repossessed by the Defendant, let alone the wider Angoropa Clan.
       
    5. Both the Complainant and the Defendant have a right to claim from the Estate of the man that adopted and raised them up, and the Disputed Land at Hegata was one Property that they both has the right to claim, but in this instance, the Estate owner had communicated his intentions by way of the Transfer Agreement/Will of 24/11/1995.
       
    6. The Estate Owner Gilchrist Kandari by virtue of the Transfer Agreement/Will of 24/11/1995, formally endorsed before a Magistrate of the District Court witnesses by the Clan Chief of the Clan that bequeathed him this Land Alkin Paratapa of Paratapa Clan, vouched for variously by the Public Curators office in Popondetta, Lands Office in Popondetta, and recently by the Customary Lands Officer Merire Dubo in open Court, is also endorsed by the Local Land Court herein as a valid and binding Legal Last Will and Testament of the deceased, clearly allocating this disputed land to the Complainant. There is no other will.
       
    7. No one can override and or revoke the intention of the Estate owner after he or she has passed and leaves behind a Will, written or otherwise communicating his last will and testament. Next of Kin included!
       

Judgment.

22. Having consider the whole of the Evidence and the submissions made by and for the Parties the Local Land Court unanimously by absolute majority Rules as follows that;
    
    1. The Validity and currency of the Land Transfer Agreement of 24/11/1995 wherein the late Gilchrist Kandari Transferred the relevant parts of Hegata Lands to Norah Sukina ‘nee’ Kandari is found to be valid, effective, binding, Currently in Legal Force.
       
    2. On that basis this Panel will award the relevant portions of The Hegata Lands in keeping with the Land Transfer Agreement of 24/11/95 to Norah Sukina ‘nee’ Kandari.
       
    3. The Defendant Chris Kandari can remain on the said Hegata Lands only at the Pleasure of the Complainant but must give vacant possession to the Complainant if and when she so requires.
       
    4. The Defendant has 90 days from today to lodge any applications and or Appeal pursuant to section 54 of the Act.
       

Complainant/Claimant for herself.

Defendant Claimant for himself.

Dated this 09^th of AUGUST 2021.