IN THE LAND COURT OF TONGA 
NUKU’ALOFA REGISTRY 		                                   
LA 11 of 2025

BETWEEN:		
VILIAMI OFAHELOTU KAUFUSI 
-Plaintiff 
 AND:			
MANO LISALA 
-Defendant 

JUDGMENT

BEFORE:	HON. JUSTICE P TUPOU KC
HON. LAND ASSESSOR SALOTE FUKOFUKA

Counsel:		Mrs. F Vaihu for the plaintiff 
			Defendant in person	
Date of Hearing:	7 October, 2025
Date of Ruling:	7 October, 2025 

The nature of the case 
[1] 	This is an application by the Plaintiff for judgment by formal proof. 

[2]	The Plaintiff is the registered holder of a tax allotment known as Kaleli situated at Leimatu’a, Vava'u (referred to hereafter as “the Land”). The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant is using the Land unlawfully and seeks orders of eviction and damages. 

[3] 	The proceedings have been served on the Defendant. He has taken no steps to defend it. 	He has had notice of the hearing today and is attending via AVL from the Vavaú Court. 

The facts 
[4] 	The Land was previously registered to Tisileli Koloke Kaufusi (referred to hereafter as “Tisileli”) on 9 May, 1969. It consists of a total area of 7a 3r 13p as contained in Deed of Grant 177/62. The Plaintiff is Tisileli’s heir. 

[5] 	Tisileli died on 20 July 2019. The Plaintiff claimed the Land as heir and was registered as holder on 21 November, 2019 and endorsed on 18 August, 2023 by the Governor of Vava’u on the said Deed of Grant. 

[6] 	The Plaintiff accepts that Tisileli during his lifetime had permitted Sione Lisala (referred to hereafter as “Sione”) to grow crops on the Land. 

[7]	Prior to his death, Tisileli surrendered the Land in favour of the Plaintiff and was approved by Cabinet on 17 July, 2019. Tisileli died before the process under s.54 was completed. 

[8]	In 2022, the Plaintiff discovered that Sione’s sons continued to occupy and grow crops on the Land. By a letter dated 19 November, 2022, the Plaintiff required Mikiloni Lisala (one of Sione’s sons) and everyone using the Land, not to plant any new crops and to vacate the Land within 12 months from the date of his letter. 

[9]	On 23 February, 2024, the Plaintiff put the town officer of Leimatu’a on notice that he was appointing Rev. Viliami Patelisi Mapapalangi to take care and control of the Land. 

[10]	The Plaintiff discovered via Rev. Mapapalangi that the Defendant continued to use the Land. The Plaintiff engaged legal advice and a letter was served on the Defendant requiring him to vacate the Land. 

[11]	The Defendant responded to the Plaintiff’s demand via his lawyer, Mr. Pouvalu. The Defendant did not oppose the demand but requested 6 to 8 months to harvest and remove his crops from the Land. The Plaintiff granted him until 30 May, 2025 to do that. In breach of that agreement, the Defendant continued to use the Plaintiff’s Land beyond May, 2025. 

[12]	These proceedings were filed and served on the Defendant on 27 June, 2025. The Defendant took no steps to defend the claim against him. 
	
[13]	When the hearing was called yesterday, the Defendant did not attend. Service of the notice of the hearing had not been successful.   Furthermore, no Land Assessor was available until 10am today and the matter was adjourned to 10am this morning. 

[14]	Notice of today’s hearing was served on the Defendant and he is in attendance via AVL from the Court in Vavaú. 

	Considerations
[15] 	On the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the Plaintiff succeeded as Tisileli as his rightful heir and is the registered holder of Land. He was entitled to immediate possession of the Land as of 21 November, 2019. 

[16]	I did not find the evidence of the surrender under s.54 of the Land Act convincing. The requirement for publication of Cabinet’s approval has not been proven and therefore the registration claimed to have occurred on 21 November, 2019 on that basis is problematic. 

[17]	I accept the evidence of the Defendant today that the registration proceeded on his claim as the rightful heir upon his father’s death. 

[18]	Apart from Rev. Viliami Patelisi Mapapalangi, the Plaintiff has not given permission to anyone including the Defendant to grow crops or use the Land. I am satisfied that demand has been made upon the Defendant to vacate the land and he has failed to do so and is a 	trespasser. 

[19] 	As for the Plaintiff’s claim for damages, no evidence was called to prove loss suffered and no such award is made. 

	Result 
[20] 	For the reasons given, it is ordered that:
	A. 	The Defendant, his agents and representatives shall forthwith vacate the Plaintiff’s registered tax allotment known as Kaleli, situated at Leimatu’a, Vava’u, being 7a 3r 13p and all that land contained in Deed of Grant 177/62. 

	B. 	The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff’s costs to be taxed, if not agreed. 

NUKU'ALOFA: 7 October, 2025

P. Tupou KC
J U D G E