Haivida Kaderbhoy v DAPCB and Others (Civil Suit 35 of 2019)

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.

Holding

The High Court entered judgment for the plaintiff on admission by the first defendant that the plaintiff lawfully repossessed plot 29 Main Street Jinja under Certificate 1168 issued by the Minister. The court declared the plaintiff the rightful proprietor entitled to quiet possession. Temporary allocations made by DAPCB to defendants 2-6 were held invalid, having been either made in error or extinguished upon repossession. Each party ordered to bear own costs.

Outcome

Plaintiff declared rightful proprietor with entitlement to quiet possession; defendants to vacate or negotiate tenancy within 30 days

Facts

The plaintiff sued for a declaration that she is the lawful owner of plot 29 Main Street Jinja LRV 452 FOLIO 22, having repossessed it on 2nd June 1992 under Certificate 1168 issued by the Minister of Finance Planning and Economic Development. The defendants contested the repossession as irregular or invalid. Defendants 2 to 6 claimed to have lawfully acquired possession through temporary allocations as tenants of the first defendant DAPCB. During cross-examination, the first defendant's Executive Secretary presented correspondence confirming that the property was repossessed by the plaintiff on 2/6/1992 under Certificate 1168. The first defendant advised defendants 2-6 to stop paying rent to DAPCB and deal with the plaintiff. An Attorney General's opinion dated 11th March 2022 confirmed that once a Repossession Certificate is issued, the property is not available to DAPCB for temporary allocation.

Issues

1. Whether the plaintiff is the lawful owner of plot 29 Main Street Jinja LRV 452 FOLIO 22 following repossession under Certificate 1168 issued on 2nd June 1992.
2. Whether the temporary allocations granted by the first defendant to defendants 2 to 6 are valid after the property was repossessed by the plaintiff.
3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to costs.

Orders

• Judgment entered for the plaintiff upon admission of facts under Order 13 Rule 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
• The plaintiff is declared the rightful proprietor of LRV 452 Folio 22, plot 29 Main Street, Jinja City.
• The plaintiff is entitled to quiet possession.
• The defendants' temporary allocations are declared invalid.
• Defendants to either enter into tenancy agreements with the plaintiff or vacate within 30 days from 12/2/2026 if no agreement is reached.
• Each party to meet their own costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (1)

• Civil Procedure Rules Order 13 Rule 6

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