Wakilii

John Ssebunya (Administrator of the Estate of the Late Tefero K. Buwembo) v Muhmood Ntege Lubwama and Others (Civil Suit 3 of 2012)

High Court · [2026] UGHCLD 160 · 2026 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of land and declaration of ownership
Decision
Plaintiff declared lawful owner of Plot 208; 1st and 2nd Defendants declared trespassers; permanent injunction granted; cadastral records ordered to be corrected; fraudulent titles to be surrendered

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 High Court found that the 1st Defendant fraudulently caused Plot 209 to be remapped in 1992 to occupy the position of Plot 208 along Gayaza Road, which he knew belonged to the late Tefero Buwembo's estate. The 2nd Defendant was not a bonafide purchaser as she failed to conduct due diligence despite the Plaintiff's visible occupation. The court declared the Plaintiff the lawful owner of Plot 208, ordered restoration of cadastral records, and directed surrender of fraudulently obtained titles for Plots 1663 and 1664.

Outcome

Plaintiff declared lawful owner of Plot 208; 1st and 2nd Defendants declared trespassers; permanent injunction granted; cadastral records ordered to be corrected; fraudulent titles to be surrendered

Facts

The late Tefero K. Buwembo owned Block 206 Plot 84, which was subdivided into Plots 207 and 208, each 0.50 acres. Plot 207 was sold to the 1st Defendant while Plot 208 remained with the deceased's estate. The deceased also owned Plot 105, subdivided into Plots 209 and 210. Plot 209 was sold to the 1st Defendant and was located behind Plot 207, not along Gayaza Road. In 1992, when the 1st Defendant obtained a special certificate of title, Plot 209's position on cadastral maps was changed to occupy the location of Plot 208 along Gayaza Road. In 1997, the 1st Defendant subdivided Plot 209 into Plots 1663 and 1664, selling Plot 1663 to the 2nd Defendant. The Plaintiff, as administrator of the deceased's estate, had been cultivating bananas on Plot 208. In October 2011, the 1st and 2nd Defendants entered the land, uprooted the plantation, graded it and fenced it off. Survey evidence and cadastral records confirmed that Plot 209 had been fraudulently remapped to replace Plot 208.

Issues

  1. Whether there was fraud in the process of remapping of plots 208 and 209 Block 206 land at Mpererwe and if so, by whom?
  2. Whether the 3rd Defendant should place Plot 208 back in the position currently occupied by Plots 1663 and 1664 (formerly Plot 209) Block 206 at Mpererwe?
  3. Whether the 2nd Defendant is a bonafide purchaser for value of Block 206 Plot 1663 Land at Mpererwe per its current deed prints?
  4. Which of the parties is entitled to ownership of the current plot of land along Gayaza road?
  5. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • Declaration that land at Kyadondo Block 206 Plot 208 at Mpererwe along Gayaza Road is property of the estate of the late Tefero Buwembo, administered by the Plaintiff.
  • Declaration that the 1st and 2nd Defendants are trespassers on the property.
  • Permanent injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their agents and representatives from interfering with the Plaintiff's possession and use of the land.
  • Commissioner for Land Registration ordered to restore the land on official cadastral maps and deed records according to the original 1965 cadastral sheet and original deed prints.
  • 1st and 2nd Defendants ordered to surrender their duplicate certificates of title for Kyadondo Block 206 Plots 1663 and 1664 (former Plot 209) to the Commissioner Land Registration within 14 days to facilitate rectification of the Register Book.
  • Commissioner for Surveys and Mapping directed to issue new deed prints for Plot 208 on Block 206 to enable the Plaintiff to obtain a special certificate of title.
  • Suit dismissed against the 3rd Defendant (Kampala Capital City Authority) as it is not liable for errors of the Commissioner Surveys and Mappings or Commissioner Land Registration.
  • Special damages of UGX 5,000,000 denied for lack of evidence.
  • 1st and 2nd Defendants ordered jointly and severally to pay the Plaintiff general damages of UGX 20,000,000.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff against the 1st and 2nd Defendants.

Rules and key headnotes

Land Registration — Fraud — Fraudulent Remapping of Cadastral Plots
Where a registered proprietor causes a plot he owns to be remapped on cadastral sheets to occupy the position of another person's registered plot, knowing the true location of his own plot and the existence of the other person's rights, such conduct constitutes fraud under the Registration of Titles Act.
Land Registration — Fraud — Knowledge and Wrongful Intention
Knowledge of another person's rights or claims over land, accompanied by deliberate acquisition of a registered title in the face of protests, amounts to fraud. Where such knowledge is accompanied by wrongful intention to defeat existing interests, it constitutes fraud under the Registration of Titles Act.
Bonafide Purchaser for Value — Duty of Inquiry — Occupation by Third Party
A purchaser who buys land knowing it is in occupation and use by another person other than the vendor, without carrying out due inquiries from the person in occupation, commits fraud and cannot claim the defence of bonafide purchaser for value. A purchaser has a duty to physically inspect land and make thorough investigations not only on the land but also on the seller.
Cadastral Mapping — Errors — Responsibility of Land Registry
The duty to issue deed prints and certificates of title is vested in the Ministry of Lands under the Registration of Titles Act. Kampala Capital City Authority has no statutory duty under the Kampala Capital City Authority Act to deal with issuance of land titles, deed prints, or cadastral mapping, and cannot be held liable for errors in cadastral plotting committed by the Commissioner for Surveys and Mapping or the Commissioner for Land Registration.
Priority of Instruments — Date of Registration
Under Section 48 of the Registration of Titles Act, priority of instruments is determined according to the date of registration. Where an instrument creating one plot precedes an instrument creating another plot, the earlier instrument has priority.
Remedies — Rectification of Register — Powers of High Court
Upon recovery of land, the High Court may under Section 161 of the Registration of Titles Act direct the Registrar to cancel any certificate of title or instrument, or any entry or memorial in the Register Book relating to that land, and to substitute such certificate of title or entry as the circumstances require. Only the Registrar of Titles/Commissioner Land Registration and the Commissioner Surveys and Mapping can be directed to correct erroneous plotting of land.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (21)

  • Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 ALL ER
  • Senkungu & 4 Ors v Mukasa (Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2014)
  • Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd & Ors (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
  • Shaban Mukasa & Anor v Lamba Enterprises Ltd & Anor (High Court Civil Suit No. 287 of 2021)
  • Kampala Bottlers Ltd v Damanico (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 22 of 1992)
  • J.W.R. Kazzora v M.L.S Rukuba (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 13 of 1992)
  • Parimal Patel v Juma Abdul Aziz & Anor (High Court Civil Suit No. 10 of 2008)
  • Fredrick J.K Zaabwe v Orient Bank & 5 Ors (Supra)
  • Hilda Wilson Namusoke & 3 Ors v Owalla's Home Investment Trust (EA) (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 15 of 2017)
  • Wanyama & 4 Ors v Bwire J Guloba (High Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2022)
  • Susan Kigula & 416 Ors v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 6 of 2003)
  • Adrabo Stanley v Madira Jimmy (Civil Suit No. 0024 Of 2013)
  • Marko Matovu v Mohammed Sseviri & Another (Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1998)
  • Kampala District Land Board & Anor v National Housing Construction Corporation (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2004)
  • Daniel Sempa Mbabali v W.K. Kizza & Ors (1985) HCB 46
  • Ndimibo Sande & 3 Ors v Allen Peace Ampaire (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 65 of 2011)
  • Kasule Robert & 2 Ors v Kakande Paul & 2 Ors (High Court Civil Appeal No. 60 of 2022)
  • KCB Bank Uganda v Paul Alinda (High Court Civil Appeal No. 37 of 2018)
  • Lwanga v Mubiru & Others (Civil Appeal No. 18 of 2022)
  • Sir John Bageire v Ausi Matovu (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1996)
  • Nabanoba Desiranta & Another v Kayiwa Joseph & Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 496 of 2005)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

John_Ssebunya_(Administrator_of_the_Estate_of_the_Late_Tefero_K._Buwembo)_v_Muhmood_Ntege_Lubwama_and_Others_(Civil_Suit_3_of_2012)_[2026]_UGHCLD_160_(8_May_2026)
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.