Wakilii

Diisi v Mbarara Stores Limited (Civil Suit No. 39 of 1995)

High Court · [1999] UGHC 45 · 1999 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit seeking declaration of ownership and compensation for developments
Decision
Plaintiff's suit dismissed; judgment entered for defendant on counterclaim; plaintiff's certificate of title cancelled; vacant possession ordered within 30 days

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 the defendant, Mbarara Stores Limited, is the lawful owner of Plot No.1, Mbaguta Street. The plaintiff's lease granted by Mbarara Municipal Council was null and void ab initio because the defendant's earlier lease had been extended by operation of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.1(2)(b). The plaintiff's developments on the property were unlawful as he had no legal interest, and he is not entitled to compensation for improvements effected as a trespasser. The defendant's eviction of the plaintiff was lawful.

Outcome

Plaintiff's suit dismissed; judgment entered for defendant on counterclaim; plaintiff's certificate of title cancelled; vacant possession ordered within 30 days

Facts

The defendant held a lease over Plot No.1, Mbaguta Street, Mbarara, dating from 1950, enlarged in 1955, and transferred to defendant in 1969. Following the 1972 expulsion of Asians, the property was taken over by the Departed Asians' Property Custodian Board. During the 1979 war, developments were destroyed and the property deteriorated. The plaintiff applied for and was allocated a lease over the property by Mbarara Municipal Council in December 1992, with the lease registered in May 1995 effective from August 1993. Meanwhile, the defendant applied for repossession under the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 and obtained a certificate of repossession in October 1995. By then, the plaintiff had constructed a double-storey commercial building with occupied shops. On 2 December 1995, the defendant took possession through court bailiffs. The plaintiff regained possession with police assistance, leading to this litigation.

Issues

  1. Who is the lawful owner of Plot No.1, Mbaguta Street, Mbarara?
  2. Whether the developments effected on the suit property by the plaintiff were lawful?
  3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to compensation from the defendant, and if so, in what quantity?
  4. Whether the eviction of the plaintiff was legal?
  5. Whether the plaintiff's re-entry amounted to trespass?
  6. What remedies are available to either party?

Orders

  • Plaintiff's case against the defendant dismissed.
  • Commissioner of Land Registration ordered to cancel the Certificate of Title held by the plaintiff in respect of the suit property.
  • Plaintiff to pay Shs.5,000,000/- to the defendant as general damages for trespass.
  • Plaintiff to hand over vacant possession of the suit property to the defendant within 30 days.
  • Costs of the suit and the counter claim awarded to the defendant.
  • Interest on damages and costs awarded at court rate from date of judgment till payment in full.

Rules and key headnotes

Expropriated Properties — Extended Leases — Effect on Subsequent Allocations
Where a lease over expropriated property is deemed to have continued in force by operation of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.1(2)(b) until the property is dealt with under that Act, a controlling authority has no proprietary interest in the property and cannot validly allocate a new lease over it, even if the original lease term has expired.
Certificate of Title — Validity — Grant Over Property Already Under Valid Lease
A lease granted and a certificate of title issued in respect of property over which a valid subsisting lease already exists are null and void and of no effect whatsoever from the very beginning, regardless of the bona fides of the subsequent grantee.
Compensation for Improvements — Expropriated Properties Act — Liability Not Mandatory
The provision in the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.11(2) making a former owner liable to pay for improvements is not mandatory. Whether liability arises must be determined judicially on a case-by-case basis taking into account the peculiar facts and circumstances, including whether the occupier had lawful basis for effecting the improvements.
Trespass — Compensation for Improvements — No Right Where Occupation Unlawful
A person whose position in relation to property is not different from that of a mere trespasser, having neither been a tenant nor having held valid title, cannot claim compensation from the lawful owner for the value of improvements effected on the property, as to hold otherwise would amount to condoning illegality.
Illegal Grant — Building Approval Before Title Allocation — Irregularity
It is irregular and indicative of unusual dealings for a controlling authority to approve a building plan for development on property before the applicant has secured any allocation of a lease or other legal interest in that property.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (6)

  • Sewanyana v Aliker [1992] KALR 116
  • Departed Asians' Property Custodian Board v Anyadra (Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1989)
  • Lutaya v Gandesha and Kampala Estates Limited (Civil Suit No. 860 of 1982)
  • Registered Trustees of Kampala Institute v Departed Asians' Property Custodian Board (Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1993)
  • Ombonye v Jamani (Civil Suit No. 541 of 1996)
  • Makula International Ltd v Nsubuga [1982] HCB 4

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.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Diisi v Mbarara Stores Limited (Civil Suit No. 39 of 1995) [1999] UGHC 45 (16 March 1999)
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.