Biroli v Nambubu & Another (Civil Suit 17 of 2024)

Observed later treatment

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 failed to prove her late husband received the suit land as a gift inter vivos from the Njazza clan because no transfer instruments or deed were executed for registered land. The deceased neither qualified as a lawful occupant under Land Act s.29(1) nor as a bona fide occupant under s.29(2). The land did not form part of the deceased's estate. However, the plaintiff, having entered the land with the 1st defendant's consent, could not be declared a trespasser when the land was sold without notice to vacate. The 2nd defendant committed trespass by developing the land while the plaintiff remained in possession.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded general damages for loss of developments but ordered to vacate the land; counterclaim dismissed

Facts

The plaintiff claimed her late husband received a kibanja on Singo Block 785 Plot 4 as a gift inter vivos from the Njazza clan and that this land formed part of his estate. The deceased allegedly constructed a matrimonial home on the land and the family resided there. In 2009 the deceased purportedly acquired mailo interests in 30 acres. The 1st defendant sold 10 acres to the 2nd defendant, who constructed a house and uprooted plaintiff's crops. The 1st defendant claimed the remaining 20 acres. The defendants contended the 1st defendant's family received 20 acres from registered proprietor Kakooza James and sold it to the 2nd defendant. They claimed the plaintiff's husband merely hired the land to cultivate and the plaintiff only asserted ownership after his death. The 2nd defendant purchased 100 acres of adjacent land and then bought the disputed 20 acres from the 1st defendant, making a total of 120 acres. The 2nd defendant counterclaimed, seeking a declaration that the plaintiff was a trespasser.

Issues

1. Whether the land/kibanja in dispute forms part of the estate of the late Biroli Joseph
2. Whether the 2nd defendant obtained registration by fraud
3. Whether the defendants trespassed on the suit kibanja
4. Whether the defendants destroyed the crops in the kibanja in issue
5. Whether the plaintiff/counter defendant trespassed on the land in issue

Orders

• The land in dispute does not form part of late Biroli Joseph's estate.
• The 2nd defendant trespassed on the land in possession of plaintiff.
• The land in dispute belongs to the 2nd defendant.
• The plaintiff is ordered to vacate the land in issue.
• The counterclaim is dismissed.
• No special damages awarded to the plaintiff.
• General damages of ten million shillings (UGX 10,000,000) awarded to the plaintiff.
• Each party to bear its own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (7)

• Evidence Act Cap 8 s.102
• Land Act Cap 236 s.29
• Land Act Cap 236 s.29(1)
• Land Act Cap 236 s.29(2)
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 240 s.59
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 240 s.161
• Civil Procedure Act s.27

Cases cited (8)

• Sebuliba v Co-operative Bank Ltd (1982) HCB 129
• Nsubuga v Kavuma (1978) HCB 307
• Lillian Nantongo and Ors v Kyobe Gerald and Anor (High Court Civil Appeal No. 0020 of 2023)
• Fredrick Zaabwe v Orient Bank and 5 Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 04 of 2006)
• Kampala District Land Board and Another v Venancio Babweyaka and 3 Others (Civil Appeal No. 02 of 2007)
• Shaban Mukasa & Anor v Lamba Enterprises Ltd & Anor (Civil Suit No. 287 of 2021)
• Justine E. M. N Lutaaya v Stirling Civil Eng. (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
• Hajji Asuman Mutekakanga v Equator Growers (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 07 of 1992)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

• Deo W. Kasozi and Another v Makumbi George and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 31 of 2024)

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