Grace ofwono v M s Poland (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 669 of 2015)
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 sale of immoveable property in execution without first depositing the duplicate certificate of title or special certificate of title in Court is a nullity and incurably defective under Civil Procedure Act s.48. A certified photocopy of the certificate of title does not satisfy the statutory requirement. The court set aside the execution sale and ordered costs to the applicant.
Outcome
Sale declared a nullity and set aside; execution may be recommenced in compliance with law
Facts
The respondent obtained a decree against the applicant and sought execution by attachment and sale of the applicant's immoveable property comprised in Kyaddondo Block 244, Plot 7778 at Kisugu. The Registrar Execution ordered the sale of the property. The applicant challenged the sale on multiple grounds, principally that the sale was conducted without the duplicate certificate of title or special certificate of title being lodged in Court as required by law. The respondent's affidavit in reply stated that a certified photocopy of the certificate of title had been attached to the application for warrant of execution and that an order of sale had been issued by the Registrar after the warrant of attachment expired.
Issues
- Whether the sale of immoveable property in execution proceedings conducted without the duplicate certificate of title or special certificate of title being lodged in Court is valid.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Sale of the suit property set aside.
- Costs awarded to the applicant.
- Registrar Execution may commence execution process afresh if decree remains unsatisfied, subject to compliance with statutory requirements.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (4)
- Kibuuka Nelson and Another v Yusuf Ziiwa (Miscellaneous Applications No. 72 and 225 of 2008)
- James Kabateraine v Charles Oundo and Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 177 of 1994)
- [1961] 3 All ER 1169
- Rosemary Eleanor Karamagi v Angoliga Malimoud (Miscellaneous Application No. 733 of 2005)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.