Joweria Katende v Zaidi Semakula (HCT-00-FD-CS-0115-2006) (HCT-00-FD-CS-0115-2006)
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 plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probability that the defendant evicted her from her matrimonial home. The evidence established that adult grandchildren of the deceased, who were sons of the heir, made it intolerable for the plaintiff to remain in the home and occupied the premises. The plaintiff's witnesses did not support her claim of direct participation by the defendant in the eviction, and the defendant provided evidence that he was away from Kampala on the alleged date of eviction. The suit was dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit dismissed; defendant not found liable for eviction
Facts
Joweria Katende was the widow of the late Juma Lulika Katende, who died on 26 February 2006. They had lived together in a matrimonial home at Nakulabye, Katende Zone for 47 years. After her husband's death, the plaintiff alleged she was unlawfully evicted on 28 November 2006 by Wasswa Umaru assisted by the defendant, Zaidi Semakula, who was one of the deceased's sons and her stepson. Evidence established that grandchildren of the deceased (sons of PW2, Ssalongo Lulika, who was the heir) occupied the premises after the death. These grandchildren — Kato Twaha, Seruntenga Kassim, Isma Mukiibi, and others — stoned the house, attempted to burn it, and abused the plaintiff, making it intolerable for her to remain. She moved to stay with one of her children. The defendant denied involvement and provided evidence he was away in Mityana from 27 to 30 November 2006 surveying land. PW2 suspected the defendant's involvement because he stood surety for the grandchildren after their arrest.
Issues
- Whether the defendant evicted or participated in the eviction of the plaintiff from her matrimonial home.
- Whether the plaintiff suffered any damages.
- Whether the plaintiff may be entitled to any other relief.
Orders
- Plaintiff's action dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Cases cited (1)
- Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.