Wakilii

G.S. Panesar v Attorney General (Civil Suit 196 of 1992)

High Court · [1994] UGHC 122 · 1994 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of debt arising from government contract, heard ex parte after defendant failed to enter appearance
Decision
Plaintiff awarded the principal sum with interest and costs

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

A government contractor who completes works and receives a final certificate of payment is entitled to recover the certified sum where government fails to pay within the contractual period. The court awarded the principal sum of shs. 4,153,235/- with interest at 30% per annum from 15 March 1989 until payment in full. Judgment in default of pleading by government is prohibited, but judgment after hearing ex parte is permissible where government has been properly served with a hearing notice.

Outcome

Plaintiff awarded the principal sum with interest and costs

Facts

The plaintiff, a government electrical contractor trading as General Electro Fridge Engineer, entered into a written contract with government on 30 September 1988 to carry out electrical installations at a building on Clement Hill Road/Kitante Road, Kampala, valued at shs. 89,329,099/-. The plaintiff completed the works and received a final certificate of payment dated 1 March 1989 for shs. 4,153,235/- issued by the Ministry of Works and Housing. The contract required payment within 14 days of presentation of the certificate, making payment due by approximately 15 March 1989. Despite the plaintiff's efforts to secure payment, government failed and refused to pay the certified sum. The Attorney General was served with summons but did not enter appearance or file a defence. After several adjournments, the matter proceeded ex parte on 22 December 1993.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum certified as due under the government contract.
  2. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to interest and if so at what rate and from what date.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the plaintiff in the sum of shs. 4,153,235/-.
  • Interest awarded at the rate of 30% per annum from 15 March 1989 until payment in full.
  • Defendant to pay the costs of the claim.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Judgment Against Government — Distinction Between Default Judgment and Judgment After Hearing
Judgment in default of pleading by government is prohibited, but judgment after hearing ex parte is permissible where government has been properly served with a hearing notice and fails to appear.
Contract Law — Government Contracts — Payment Obligations — Final Certificate — Binding Effect
Where a government contractor completes works under a written contract and receives a final certificate of payment from the relevant ministry, the government is bound to pay the certified sum in accordance with the contractual payment terms.
Damages & Quantum — Interest — Contractual Debt — Assessment of Rate — Loss of Use of Money
A creditor who is deprived of the use of money due under contract is entitled to interest as compensation for loss flowing from failure to pay a debt when due. Where no useful evidence of the proper interest rate is adduced, the court will assess the rate having regard to prevailing bank lending and deposit rates at the material time.

Cases cited (1)

  • Attorney General v Sengende [1972] EA 356

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

G.S. Panesar v Attorney General (Civil Suit 196 of 1992) [1994] UGHC 122 (12 January 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.