Kabanekera & Another v Kasoro (Civil Suit 45 of 2021)

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 court held that the suit land remained part of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara because the defendant failed to prove a valid gift inter vivos despite claiming the land was gifted to him in 1980. The court found that the defendant fraudulently obtained letters of administration by misrepresenting his relationship to the deceased and omitting beneficiaries, and that he mismanaged the estate by selling portions without consent. The letters of administration were revoked, the plaintiffs were declared beneficiaries entitled to share in the estate, and general damages of UGX 5,000,000 were awarded to each plaintiff.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the plaintiffs with declarations, revocation of letters of administration, order for deregistration, general damages, and permanent injunction

Facts

The plaintiffs, granddaughters of the late Revocat Kahimbara who died intestate in 1989, sued their brother (the defendant) claiming he fraudulently obtained letters of administration for their grandmother's estate. The suit concerned land comprised in LRV 1859 Folio 4 Plot 3 Block 80 at Burahya, Kabarole. The defendant claimed he had been gifted the land inter vivos in 1980. The plaintiffs testified they and their parents had lived on the suit land since 1969, and that the defendant forcibly evicted them in 1998. The defendant applied for and obtained letters of administration in 1998, stating he was a son of the deceased whereas he was actually her grandson, and failed to disclose the second plaintiff as a beneficiary. During his administration, the defendant sold portions of the suit land to third parties and distributed other portions to his sons without the plaintiffs' consent. A gift deed dated 1980 was produced by the defendant, but the certificate of title showed the deceased was only registered as owner in July 1990, a year after her death.

Issues

1. Whether the suit land is part of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara or the defendant.
2. Whether the plaintiffs are the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara, and if so, whether they are entitled to a share in the suit land.
3. Whether the defendant fraudulently obtained letters of administration of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara.
4. Whether the defendant mismanaged the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara.
5. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

• Declaration that the suit land comprised in LRV 1859 Folio 4 Block 80 Plot 3 land at Burahya, Kabarole is part of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara.
• Declaration that the plaintiffs are beneficiaries of the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara and are entitled to share in the said estate in accordance with the law.
• Declaration that the defendant mismanaged the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara.
• Letters of administration granted to the defendant for the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara are revoked.
• Commissioner of Land Registration ordered to deregister the defendant from the certificate of title of the land comprised in LRV 1859 Folio 4 Block 80 Plot 3 land at Burahya, Kabarole.
• Defendant ordered to make good the loss he occasioned to the estate of the late Revocat Kahimbara.
• Defendant ordered to pay each plaintiff UGX 5,000,000 in general damages.
• Permanent injunction issued restraining the defendant or anyone claiming under him from further selling or distributing the suit land without the consent of the plaintiffs.
• Costs of the suit to be borne by the defendant.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (8)

• Evidence Act Cap 43 s.101-103
• Registration of Titles Act s.59
• Succession Act Cap 268 s.2(ma)
• Succession Act Cap 268 s.27
• Succession Act Cap 268 s.234(1)
• Succession Act Cap 268 s.234(2)
• Civil Procedure Act s.27(2)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 15 Rule 5

Cases cited (19)

• Lancaster v. Blackwell Colliery Co. Ltd 1982 WC Rep 345
• Sebuliba v Cooperative Bank Ltd (1982) HCB 130
• Jolly Mukobe v Willy Wambuwi (High Court Civil Appeal No. 55 of 2005)
• Sajjabi John v Zaiwa Charles (High Court Civil Appeal No. 50 of 2012)
• Oyet Bosco & Another v Bwola Vincent (High Court Civil Appeal No. 68 of 2016)
• Elizabeth Komuhendo v Patrick Sabiti & 5 Others (High Court Civil Appeal No. 27 of 2020)
• Fredrick J.K. Zaabwe v Orient Bank Ltd and 5 Others (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
• Attorney General v AKPM Lutaaya (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2007)
• Kakumirizi Regina & 2 Others v Namuyomba Rose & Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 7 of 2019)
• 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)
• B.E.A. Timber Co. v. Inder Singh Gill (1959) E.A. 463
• Moshe Mujogya & 3 Others v Smart Bwango & 2 Others (High Court Succession Cause No. 37 of 2018)
• Richard Babumba & 13 Others v Ames Ssali Babumba (High Court Civil Suit No. 78 of 2012)
• Boardman & Another v. Phipps (1966) WLR 1009
• J.K Patel v Spear Motors Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1991)
• Katakanya & Others v Raphael Bikongoro (High Court Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2010)
• Kivumbi Paul v Namugenyi Zulah (Civil Revision No. 10 of 2014)
• Kiska Ltd Vs De Angelias [1969] EA 6

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