Wakilii

Emmanuel Kimote Mulindwa v Tomusange Emmanuel & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 2009) (Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 2009)

High Court · [2009] UGHC 102 · 2009 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for temporary injunction arising from civil suit concerning disputed property
Decision
Temporary injunction granted; rental income to be deposited in court monthly pending determination of main suit

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 where parties consent to maintain the status quo of disputed property, a temporary injunction will be granted. Where the applicant as registered proprietor seeks recovery of rent in the main suit and the respondents' affidavit evidence does not contest depositing rental income in court, the court will order monthly rental income to be deposited with court until full determination of the suit to preserve the funds for the successful party.

Outcome

Temporary injunction granted; rental income to be deposited in court monthly pending determination of main suit

Facts

The applicant is the registered proprietor of property from which the respondents are collecting rental income of Shs. 1,870,000 monthly. Civil Suit No. 200 of 2009 is pending between the parties concerning the property. The respondents occupy two rooms on the property while tenants occupy the rest. The applicant sought a temporary injunction and an order requiring rental income to be deposited in court. Parties consented to maintaining the status quo with respondents continuing to occupy two rooms. Parties disagreed on depositing rental income in court. The 1st respondent's affidavit did not object to depositing rent in court, though his counsel opposed it. The 2nd respondent filed no affidavit in reply. The applicant seeks recovery of rent received by respondents as part of the relief in the main suit.

Issues

  1. Whether a temporary injunction should be granted restraining the respondents from interfering with the suit property.
  2. Whether rental income from the disputed property should be deposited in court pending determination of the main suit.

Orders

  • Temporary injunction granted by consent.
  • Rental income of Shs. 1,870,000 or as the case may be to be deposited with court on a monthly basis until full hearing and determination of the main suit.
  • Collection and deposit of rent to be supervised by counsel for all parties.
  • Costs of the application to abide the results of the main suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Temporary Injunctions — Consent Orders — Maintenance of Status Quo
Where parties consent to maintain the status quo of disputed property pending determination of the main suit, the court will grant a temporary injunction on consent giving effect to that agreement.
Interim Orders — Deposit of Rental Income — Affidavit Evidence
Where an applicant seeks an order requiring respondents to deposit rental income from disputed property in court and the respondents' affidavit evidence does not contest that specific relief, the relief stands uncontested and counsel's submissions from the bar cannot override the affidavit position.
Interim Orders — Preservation of Subject Matter — Rental Income
Where the main suit seeks recovery of rent collected by respondents and allowing them to continue receiving and spending rent could create hardships in the event they lose the suit, it is fair and just to order that disputed rental income be deposited in a neutral place such as the court pending determination to preserve it for the successful party.

Legislation cited (2)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Emmanuel Kimote Mulindwa v Tomusange Emmanuel & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 2009) (Miscellaneous Application No.518 of 2009) [2009] UGHC 102 (7 September 2009)
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.