Gokaldas Laximidas Tanna (Civil Appeal 12 of 92)
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 suit property had been expropriated as a departed Asian's asset and vested in Government under the management of the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board. Although Uganda Commercial Bank, as mortgagee, had sold it by public auction to the appellant, the Court held that section 1 of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 nullified any purchase, transfer or grant of such property. The sale and transfer to the appellant were therefore void. The Court further observed that parties cannot by agreement oust the court's jurisdiction to return the proper verdict, so the determinative statutory issue had to be answered regardless of the parties' agreed terms. Even if every ground of appeal succeeded, the appeal would still fail because the sale was nullified by statute.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; the sale and transfer of the expropriated property to the appellant held nullified by the Expropriated Properties Act 1982
Facts
The suit property was originally registered in the name of Vipinchandra Dhavantal Desai, a departed Asian, and had been expropriated by Government since August 1972, coming under the control of the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board, which became its legal owner with all incumbrances. On 22 February 1982 Uganda Commercial Bank, as mortgagee of the property, advertised and sold it the same day to the appellant, executed a transfer into his name and released the mortgage. The appellant was registered as proprietor in 1984. His registration was later cancelled and then restored by court order. At the relevant time the property was occupied by the first respondent as a tenant of the Board. The first respondent refused to recognise the appellant's claim of ownership. The Board contended that the transaction between the Bank and the appellant was nullified by the Expropriated Properties Act 1982 and that the property remained vested in Government.
Issues
- Whether the sale and transfer of expropriated departed-Asian property by Uganda Commercial Bank as mortgagee was nullified by section 1 of the Expropriated Properties Act 1982.
- Whether parties may by agreement bind the court to enter judgment without the court determining a live legal issue on the pleadings and facts.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.1
- Expropriated Properties Act 1982 s.5(2)
- Mortgage Decree 1974
- Assets of Departed Asians Decree 1973
- Rules of the Supreme Court rule 91
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.