Wakilii

Christopher Marimanya v Abdu Kasule and 2 Others (Civil Suit No. 159 of 1993)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 143 · 1994 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass heard in the absence of the defendants
Decision
Defendants ordered to vacate within 14 days; eviction order to issue forthwith

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 a Certificate of Title is conclusive evidence of ownership under s.56 of the Registration of Titles Act. The defendants, who entered the plaintiff's registered land and cultivated it without permission after 1992, committed trespass. The plaintiff proved damage including forced reduction of livestock, compensation payments when cattle strayed onto defendants' crops, and travel expenses. An eviction order and general damages of UGX 900,000 were awarded for trespass continuing over one and a half years.

Outcome

Defendants ordered to vacate within 14 days; eviction order to issue forthwith

Facts

In 1983, the plaintiff purchased approximately 250 acres at Bulimbale village, Masaka District, from Kajarasi. He obtained a Certificate of Title in 1988 (Leasehold Register Vol 1698 Folio 14, Buddu Block 983) and used the land for mixed farming and grazing. In August 1992, his herdsman reported that three defendants were questioning his right to graze and obstructing movement of animals. The defendants cultivated approximately 20 acres without permission, planting maize, groundnuts, potatoes, eucalyptus trees and bananas. The plaintiff attempted to have surveyors re-open boundaries but was prevented by the defendants and a hostile crowd. His lawyers sent notices to quit in early 1993 which were ignored. The defendants continued cultivating despite a temporary injunction. The plaintiff had to reduce his livestock and incurred travel expenses dealing with the dispute. The defendants were served but did not appear at trial.

Issues

  1. Whether the land in dispute belongs to the plaintiff.
  2. Whether the defendants trespassed on the suit land.
  3. Whether the plaintiff has suffered any damage.
  4. What remedies are available to the plaintiff if any.

Orders

  • The defendants are ordered to vacate the suit property within 14 days hereof. The eviction order shall issue forthwith.
  • General damages of shs. 900,000/= for trespass with interest at court rate from the date hereof until payment in full.
  • The defendants to pay the costs of this suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Certificate of Title — Conclusive Evidence of Ownership
A Certificate of Title is conclusive evidence of ownership under s.56 of the Registration of Titles Act, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, establishes the registered proprietor's title to the land described therein.
Trespass to Land — Elements of Proof
Trespass to land is established where a defendant enters upon land registered in the plaintiff's name and cultivates it without permission, and continues such cultivation after receiving notice to cease.
Trespass to Land — Joint and Several Liability
Where multiple defendants act in concert to trespass on land, they are jointly and severally liable for the trespass and resulting damages.
General Damages for Trespass — Assessment Principles
In assessing general damages for trespass to land, the court considers the extent and duration of the trespass, restriction on the plaintiff's use of the land, expenses incurred in addressing the trespass, and the inconvenience suffered.

Legislation cited (1)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Christopher Marimanya v Abdu Kasule and 2 Others (Civil Suit No. 159 of 1993) [1994] UGHC 143 (2 March 1994)
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.