Wakilii

Babumba & 2 ors v Nakasi (Civil Suit No. 173 of 1987)

High Court · [1992] UGHC 19 · 1992 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Suit brought under section 265 of the Succession Act to remove caveat and grant letters of administration
Decision
Letters of administration granted to the two surviving plaintiffs to administer the estate of the late Erifasi Kizito

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 removed the defendant's caveat and granted letters of administration to the surviving plaintiffs. Held that under section 6 of the Administrator General Act, a widow takes precedence over other relatives for grant of letters of administration, but widowhood must be established through proof of marriage or cohabitation at time of death. Having children by the deceased is insufficient to confer widowhood status. The defendant failed to adduce evidence of marriage or cohabitation with the deceased.

Outcome

Letters of administration granted to the two surviving plaintiffs to administer the estate of the late Erifasi Kizito

Facts

The deceased Erifasi Kizito died leaving nine children from six different women. The three plaintiffs (brother, nephew, and niece of the deceased) petitioned for letters of administration in Administration Cause No. 202/86. The defendant, one of six women who had children with the deceased, lodged a caveat claiming to be his widow. The first plaintiff died in 1987, leaving two plaintiffs to proceed. The Administrator General declined to administer the estate, issuing a letter of no objection dated 19/6/86. The defendant had filed a parallel application in the Chief Magistrate's Court which was dismissed for want of prosecution. At the High Court hearing, the defendant and her counsel failed to appear despite proper service. Evidence showed the deceased was not married customarily or otherwise to any woman and did not cohabit with the defendant, who lived at Bugerere.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant's caveat should be removed.
  2. Whether letters of administration should be granted to the plaintiffs.
  3. Whether the defendant qualifies as a widow of the deceased and thereby takes precedence over other relatives for grant of letters of administration.

Orders

  • The defendant's caveat lodged against the plaintiffs' application is removed.
  • Letters of Administration are granted to the two surviving plaintiffs, Edward Bamujje and Keti Namyalo, to administer the Estate of the late Erifasi Kizito.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Letters of Administration — Priority of Application — Widow's Precedence
Under section 6 of the Administrator General Act, a widower or widow of the deceased takes precedence over all other relatives of the deceased when considering grant of letters of administration.
Letters of Administration — Proof of Widowhood — Requirements
For a person to qualify as a widow of the deceased and thereby take precedence in grant of letters of administration, evidence must be adduced to show that she was married to the deceased either customarily or otherwise, or that she was cohabitating with the deceased at the time of his death. Having a child or children by the deceased is not sufficient to confer widowhood.
Letters of Administration — Administrator General — Letter of No Objection
Under section 6 of the Administrator General Act, no grant of letters of administration shall be made except to an executor appointed by will or to a widower or widow until the applicant has produced proof that the Administrator General has declined to administer the estate or that notice of at least 14 clear days has been given to the Administrator General of intention to apply for such grant. A letter of no objection from the Administrator General is evidence of such decline.
Exparte Hearing — Failure to Appear — Service of Notice
Where there is satisfactory evidence of service of hearing notice on the defendant and the defendant fails to appear without explanation, the court may allow the hearing to proceed exparte under Order 9 rule 17(1)(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules.

Legislation cited (4)

  • Succession Act s.265
  • Administrator General Act s.6
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.15 r.6
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.9 r.17(1)(a)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Babumba & 2 ors v Nakasi (Civil Suit No. 173 of 1987) [1992] UGHC 19 (13 April 1992)
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.