Bantariza v Habre International Trading (Civil Suit 499 of 1992)
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 held that the defendant was the registered owner of the suit land, having acquired title earlier than the plaintiff on 14 March 1985 compared to the plaintiff's title registered on 16 December 1991. There was no evidence of fraud in the defendant's acquisition of title. The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove his claim on a balance of probabilities. The suit was dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Suit dismissed with costs to the defendant
Facts
The plaintiff claimed to be the registered proprietor of Plot No. 4805 Kyadondo Block 244 Kampala (0.309 hectares). He alleged that in early 1990 the defendant trespassed on part of his land by building two illegal structures and hindering surveyors. The defendant denied trespass and claimed to be the registered owner of land comprised in Kyadondo Block 244, Plot No. 3779 (0.690 hectares), with leasehold register No. 1380 folio 14. The defendant stated it built structures on its own land with approved plans. The plaintiff alleged the defendant's title was obtained fraudulently and that the land originally belonged to the National Water and Sewerage Corporation. Evidence showed the defendant's title was registered on 14 March 1985 while the plaintiff's title was registered on 16 December 1991.
Issues
- Who of the two parties owns the suit land?
- Whether the suit land claimed is the same as that referred to in the defence?
Orders
- Plaintiff's suit dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (1)
- Gandesha 1986 HCB p 46
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.