Wakilii

Dr. Emmy Tugume Beraho and Another v Tinkasiimire John and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 799 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 182 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for preservation order arising from pending civil suit
Decision
Application dismissed with costs to the respondents

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 dismissed the application for a preservation order seeking to prevent cancellation of a certificate of title. The applicants sought to preserve land comprised in Kibuga Block 28 Plot 1244 pending determination of a civil suit. The court held that the application constituted an abuse of court process as it sought to counter previous court orders that had already cancelled the title in question. The proper remedy lay in challenging those prior orders through appropriate proceedings, not through a preservation order in a separate suit.

Outcome

Application dismissed with costs to the respondents

Facts

The applicants were registered proprietors of land comprised in Kibuga Block 28 Plot 1244 at Makerere, which they had purchased from predecessors in title. The land was originally part of Plot 540. In 2021, the first respondent instituted Civil Suit No. 620 of 2021 claiming a kibanja interest. In March 2025, the applicants learned that the Commissioner Land Registration was cancelling their certificate of title pursuant to orders in prior litigation (HCCS No. 95 of 2009 and HCMA No. 1863 of 2017) brought by the second respondent. Those prior proceedings had found that Plot 540 had been fraudulently subdivided into Plots 1244, 1245, 1246 and 1247, and ordered cancellation of those subdivisions and restoration of Plot 540 to the estate of the late Musa Kalanzi Muganzi. The applicants' predecessors in title had unsuccessfully appealed those decisions to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The Commissioner was now implementing those cancellation orders.

Issues

  1. Whether there are sufficient grounds for grant of the preservation order.
  2. Whether the application constitutes an abuse of court process.
  3. Whether the court can issue preservation orders that would interfere with existing court orders and decrees from prior litigation.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Preservation Orders — Abuse of Court Process — Application Seeking to Counter Prior Court Orders
A preservation order application that seeks to counter or stay the execution of previous court orders that have not been challenged through appropriate proceedings constitutes an abuse of court process, as it uses the process for a purpose for which it was not established.
Civil Procedure — Execution of Decrees — Separate Suits — Interference with Execution
Under Section 34(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, all questions relating to the execution, discharge or satisfaction of a decree must be determined by the court executing the decree and not by a separate suit. A court cannot issue orders in an application arising from a separate suit that would interfere with the execution of orders and decrees from prior litigation.
Land & Property — Certificate of Title — Cancelled Titles — Legal Existence
Where titles have been found irregular and cancelled by court order, they do not exist legally regardless of any physical possession or dealings. The Commissioner Land Registration is obliged to give effect to such cancellation orders.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (1)

  • Attorney General v James Mark Kamoga and Another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2004)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Dr._Emmy_Tugume_Beraho_and_Another_v_Tinkasiimire_John_and_Others_(Miscellaneous_Application_No._799_of_2025)_[2025]_UGHCLD_182_(13_June_2025)
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.