Wakilii

Asha Chad v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 693 of 1992)

High Court · [1993] UGHC 137 · 1993 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Appeal from decision of Minister under Expropriated Properties Act 1982 — preliminary objection and application for joinder heard
Decision
Preliminary objection and application for joinder dismissed; adjournment refused; appeal to proceed to hearing

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

Held that under the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.14, an appeal lies only from a person aggrieved by the Minister's decision. A third party claiming to own the expropriated property was not aggrieved by the Minister's refusal to grant repossession to the appellant and therefore could not be joined as a party to the statutory appeal. Application for joinder dismissed. Application for further adjournment by the respondent also dismissed after repeated prior adjournments.

Outcome

Preliminary objection and application for joinder dismissed; adjournment refused; appeal to proceed to hearing

Facts

Asha Chad, widow and executrix of the estate of Karam Chand, applied for repossession of property LRV 255 folio plot 2 Impala Avenue under the Expropriated Properties Act 1982. The property had been expropriated under the Assets of Departed Asians Decree No. 27/73 after her late husband left Uganda in 1972. The Minister of Finance refused repossession on the ground that the property had been sold by the DAPC Board and only compensation would be paid. The appellant appealed to the High Court. At the hearing, counsel for Muhammed Kiwanuka, who claimed to be the registered proprietor in possession since 1979, sought to be joined as a party. The State Attorney for the respondent applied for a further adjournment to settle the matter, having obtained multiple prior adjournments on similar grounds.

Issues

  1. Whether a third party claiming ownership of the suit property may be joined as a party to a statutory appeal under the Expropriated Properties Act 1982.
  2. Whether a further adjournment should be granted to the respondent to settle the matter out of court.

Orders

  • Application by Mr. Serwanga for Muhammed Kiwanuka to be joined as a party to the appeal dismissed.
  • Application by the learned State Attorney for adjournment dismissed.
  • Appeal fixed for hearing.
  • Costs of this application provided for.

Rules and key headnotes

Statutory Appeals — Standing to Appeal — Expropriated Properties Act
Under section 14(1) of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982, only a person aggrieved by a decision of the Minister may appeal to the High Court. A third party claiming ownership of the property is not aggrieved by the Minister's refusal to grant repossession to the appellant and cannot be joined as a party to the appeal.
Joinder of Parties — Statutory Appeals
In a statutory appeal under the Expropriated Properties Act 1982, the parties are defined by the statute as the appellant (the person aggrieved) and the Minister (represented by the Attorney General). A third party with a competing interest in the subject matter cannot be added as a party to the appeal absent statutory provision permitting joinder.
Adjournment — Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Where a party has been granted multiple adjournments on repeated representations that the matter would be settled out of court and those representations prove unfounded, the court may in its discretion refuse a further adjournment and proceed with the hearing.

Legislation cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Asha Chad v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 693 of 1992) [1993] UGHC 137 (15 September 1993)
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.