Wakilii

Joseph Sajjabi Kibuyaga v Kataabu George [2026] UGHCLD 169

High Court · 2026 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Hearing of a summary suit on a specially endorsed plaint after the defendant had been granted conditional leave to appear and defend
Decision
Judgment and decree entered for the plaintiff for UGX 120,000,000 with interest at 16% per annum from 5 November 2025 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

Judgment was entered for the plaintiff in a summary suit for UGX 120,000,000 said to arise under an agreement for sale of land. The defendant had earlier obtained an order setting aside default judgment and granting conditional leave to defend, requiring him to file a defence within ten days and deposit UGX 40,000,000 (one third of the decretal sum) as security within thirty days. He did neither, did not appear, and offered no explanation or application for extension of time. The court held the plaintiff was entitled to a decree under Order 36 rule 3(2) and Order 17 rule 4, with interest at 16% per annum and costs.

Outcome

Judgment and decree entered for the plaintiff for UGX 120,000,000 with interest at 16% per annum from 5 November 2025 and costs

Facts

The plaintiff sued the defendant by summary procedure on a specially endorsed plaint under Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules, claiming UGX 120,000,000 with interest and costs on the basis of an alleged agreement for the sale of land comprised in Block 124 Plot 23 at Mawokota, Namutamada, Mpigi District. On 9 March 2015 the Registrar entered judgment and a decree in default of an application for leave to defend for the liquidated sum claimed plus costs. Execution proceedings followed, first in the Execution Division and later in the Land Division. In November 2025 the defendant applied to set aside the judgment and decree and for leave to appear and defend. That application was granted on 23 March 2026 on conditions: the defendant was to file his defence within ten days of the ruling and pay into court UGX 40,000,000, being one third of the decretal sum, within thirty days. By 7 May 2026, when the suit came up for hearing, the defendant had neither paid the security deposit nor filed a defence, and neither he nor his counsel appeared to seek an extension of time or explain the non-compliance.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff was entitled to judgment under Order 36 rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules where the defendant failed to comply with the conditions imposed when granting him leave to appear and defend the summary suit.

Orders

  • Judgment and decree entered against the defendant in default of an application for leave to defend and for failure to pay the requisite security deposit.
  • The defendant shall pay the plaintiff UGX 120,000,000 as money arising under an agreement of sale.
  • The defendant shall pay interest on the said sum at 16% per annum from November 5, 2025 until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit and of HCMA No. 2294 of 2025 awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits (Order 36) — Conditional Leave to Defend — Effect of Non-Compliance with Conditions
Where a defendant in a summary suit is granted leave to appear and defend on conditions as to filing a defence and payment of a security deposit into court, failure to comply with those conditions entitles the plaintiff to judgment and a decree under Order 36 rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Non-Appearance at Hearing — Judgment Under Order 17 Rule 4
A defendant who neither appears at the hearing nor applies for an extension of time nor offers any explanation for failing to comply with conditional orders of the court exposes himself to judgment being entered against him under Order 17 rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Contract Law — Agreement for Sale of Land — Recovery of Liquidated Sum with Statutory Interest
A liquidated sum arising under an agreement for the sale of land is recoverable by summary procedure, and the court may in its discretion award interest on the decretal sum under section 26(2) of the Civil Procedure Act until payment in full.

Legislation cited (8)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Joseph Sajjabi Kibuyaga v Kataabu George [2026] UGHCLD 169 (7 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.