Wakilii

Abdul Karim Kironde v Rogers Ddungu and Others (Civil Suit No. 54 of 2015)

High Court · [2026] UGHCLD 20 · 2026 Suit Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for declaration of bonafide occupancy and permanent injunction
Decision
Suit dismissed for want of prosecution

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 2 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 2 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Citations rising — 4 citing cases on record, 4 in the most recent three data years. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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

The High Court dismissed the suit under Order 17 Rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules and section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act for failure by both parties to take any action for over two years. Despite court directives to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum and trial bundles, neither party complied or took steps to proceed with the matter since May 2021.

Outcome

Suit dismissed for want of prosecution

Facts

The plaintiff instituted a suit seeking a declaration that he was a bonafide occupant of property comprised in LRV 118 Folio 7 Plot 4 Fort Road, and a permanent injunction restraining the first and second defendants from claiming ownership or evicting him. The matter was last heard on 6 May 2021, when parties were directed to file a Joint Scheduling Memorandum and trial bundles. Neither party complied with the court directives or took any steps to proceed with the suit from May 2021 onwards. The court noted that over two years had elapsed without any action by either party.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit should be dismissed for want of prosecution where parties failed to take any steps for over two years.

Orders

  • Case dismissed under Order 17 Rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 and Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 for non-action by the parties for over two years.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Dismissal for Want of Prosecution — Order 17 Rule 6(1)
Where no application is made or step taken by either party for a period of two years with a view to proceeding with the suit, the court may order the suit to be dismissed under Order 17 Rule 6(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Inherent Powers of Court — Section 98 Civil Procedure Act
The court retains inherent power under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of court, including dismissal for want of prosecution.
Civil Procedure — Duty of Plaintiff — Expeditious Prosecution
A plaintiff who is in pursuit of a remedy should take all necessary steps at his disposal to achieve an expeditious determination of his claim.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (1)

  • Nilani v Patel and Others (1969) EA 340

Cases citing this judgment (2)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Abdul_Karim_Kironde_v_Rogers_Ddungu_and_Others_(Civil_Suit_No._54_of_2015)_[2026]_UGHCLD_20_(28_January_2026)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.