Wakilii

Ariho & Anor v Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd & 2 Ors (CIVIL SUIT NO.14 OF 2016)

High Court · [2016] UGHCCD 112 · 2016 Preliminary Objection Upheld AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Preliminary objection raised by defendants to strike off amended pleadings filed without leave of court
Decision
Amended pleadings struck off; matter to proceed on original pleadings with liberty to apply for amendment properly

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.

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 court struck off the amended plaint and chamber summons filed by the plaintiffs without leave of court on 10 June 2016. The amendments were filed beyond the 14-day period allowed under Order 6 Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules after the first and second defendants filed their written statement of defence on 25 May 2016. The court rejected the plaintiffs' argument that no defence had been filed and held that all parties must answer to the same set of pleadings.

Outcome

Amended pleadings struck off; matter to proceed on original pleadings with liberty to apply for amendment properly

Facts

On 18 May 2016, the plaintiffs filed a civil suit against three defendants and applied for a temporary injunction. The first and second defendants filed a joint written statement of defence on 25 May 2016. On 10 June 2016, the plaintiffs filed an amended plaint and amended chamber summons without leave of court, introducing a fourth defendant. At the hearing of the application for temporary injunction, counsel for the first and second defendants raised a preliminary objection contending that the amended pleadings were filed beyond the 14-day period allowed under Order 6 Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The plaintiffs' counsel argued that he had been informed no defence had been filed and that he found no defence on the court file when he perused it on 8 June 2016.

Issues

  1. Whether the amended plaint and chamber summons filed by the plaintiffs on 10 June 2016 without leave of court should be struck off the record.
  2. Whether the plaintiffs were within the 14-day period under Order 6 Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules to amend without leave after the defendants filed their written statement of defence.

Orders

  • Preliminary objection upheld.
  • Amended plaint and chamber summons struck off the court file.
  • Hearing of the application may proceed on the basis of the plaint and chamber summons filed on 18 May 2016.
  • Plaintiff at liberty to properly apply for amendment.
  • Costs awarded to the plaintiffs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Time Limits for Amendment Without Leave
Under Order 6 Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules, a plaintiff may amend the plaint once without leave within 14 days from the filing of the written statement of defence or the last of such written statements.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Filing After Time Limit
Where a plaintiff files an amended plaint beyond the 14-day period allowed under Order 6 Rule 20 without first obtaining leave of court, the amended pleadings are incorrectly on the record and must be struck off.
Civil Procedure — Filing of Pleadings — Completion of Filing
Filing of a written statement of defence is complete when it is endorsed by the registrar, filing fees are paid, and the court receiving stamp is affixed, regardless of whether service has been effected on the opposite party.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Uniform Pleadings for All Parties
All parties in the same cause must answer to the same set of pleadings; it is not permissible for some defendants to respond to original pleadings while others respond to amended pleadings that have been struck off the record.

Legislation cited (2)

  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.20
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.5 r.1(2)

Cases cited (2)

  • Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 14 of 1994)
  • Edward Kabugo v Bank of Baroda (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 203 of 2007)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ariho & Anor v Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd & 2 Ors (CIVIL SUIT NO.14 OF 2016) [2016] UGHCCD 112 (21 July 2016)
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.