Ahmed Katende Salongo v Haji Yasin Kikomeko & Anors (HCT-00-CV-CA-0078 OF 1998) (HCT-00-CV-CA-0078 of 1998)

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

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.

Holding

Held that the plaintiff had a better and superior title to the suit land than the defendants. The trial magistrate erred in refusing an eviction order despite finding the defendants had no lawful interest in the land. The Registrar of Titles acted improperly in cancelling the plaintiff's certificate of title based on an implied interpretation of a High Court order that merely directed reinstatement of caveats. The plaintiff retained a valid instrument of transfer giving him registerable interest. The award of special damages was improper as it was not pleaded.

Outcome

Appellant granted vacant possession of the suit premises

Facts

The plaintiff purchased land described as Block 4 plot 663 (later divided into plots 719 and 721) in Bakuli, Kampala, from Norah Twemanye on 20 May 1993 for shs.900,000. John Kizza, the registered proprietor by virtue of letters of administration, signed a transfer instrument in the plaintiff's favour and the plaintiff became registered proprietor. Both defendants built a building on the land without the plaintiff's permission. The first defendant claimed to have purchased a house and kibanja from the second defendant and land from Norah Twemanye, and placed a caveat over the premises. The plaintiff had the caveat removed, but the first defendant's lawyers had it reinstated. The Registrar of Titles then cancelled the plaintiff's certificate of title, claiming to act on an implied interpretation of a High Court order that directed reinstatement of caveats. The second defendant testified he succeeded only to houses on the land, not the land itself, which remained with Norah Twemanye. Norah Twemanye initially denied selling land to the plaintiff but in cross-examination admitted that Jane Nabwemi sold the land and passed shs.500,000 to her. The trial magistrate entered judgment purportedly in favour of the plaintiff but refused an eviction order, holding he was not the lawful proprietor, while simultaneously awarding him special and general damages.

Issues

1. Whether the plaintiff was the lawful proprietor of the suit land and entitled to an eviction order.
2. Whether the trial magistrate erred in holding that the plaintiff was not the lawful proprietor despite finding that he lawfully purchased the land.
3. Whether the Registrar of Titles acted lawfully in cancelling the plaintiff's certificate of title by implication from a High Court order reinstating caveats.
4. Whether the first defendant had purchased the suit land prior to the plaintiff and had a superior claim.
5. Whether the award of special damages of shs.900,000/= was proper when it was neither pleaded nor proved.

Orders

• Appeal allowed.
• Cross-appeal dismissed save for ground 1(b) and ground 2 (regarding special damages).
• Order for vacant possession of the suit premises in favour of the appellant/plaintiff.
• Taxed costs of the appeal and cross-appeal awarded to the appellant.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Illiterates Protection Act (cap 73)

Cases cited (1)

• Christopher Zimbe v Tokana Kamanza (1954) 7 ULR 31

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