Wakilii

Kafeero and Another v Jaggwe and Another (civil suit no. 431 2013)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 192 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiffs AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for declarations and injunction arising from unlawful sale of tenancy by occupancy
Decision
Judgment entered for the Plaintiffs; 1st Defendant's kibanja interest forfeited and reverted to Plaintiffs; permanent injunction issued against Defendants

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

Held that a tenant by occupancy who sells his kibanja interest without first offering it to the registered mailo proprietor as required by section 35(1) of the Land (Amendment) Act 2010 lacks capacity to contract under sections 35 and 36 of the Land Act. The purported sale agreement is unlawful and not a valid contract. The tenant's kibanja interest is forfeited and reverts to the registered proprietors.

Outcome

Judgment entered for the Plaintiffs; 1st Defendant's kibanja interest forfeited and reverted to Plaintiffs; permanent injunction issued against Defendants

Facts

The Plaintiffs are registered proprietors of land comprised in Busiro Block 327 Plot 55 at Nabbingo, Bataka Zone. The 1st Defendant was a tenant by occupancy on the suit land, a status confirmed by the Chief Magistrate's Court of Mpigi in 2012 and upheld on appeal by the High Court in 2016. During the pendency of the appeal, on 13 August 2013, the 1st Defendant sold his entire kibanja interest to the 2nd Defendant without giving the Plaintiffs, as registered mailo proprietors, first option to purchase as required by section 35(1) of the Land (Amendment) Act 2010. The 2nd Defendant subsequently sub-divided the land into plots and sold them to third parties. The Plaintiffs brought this suit seeking declarations that the sale was invalid and orders for forfeiture of the kibanja interest and a permanent injunction.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiffs are registered proprietors of the suit land?
  2. Whether the sale of a Kibanja interest by the 1st Defendant to the 2nd Defendant was lawful?
  3. What remedies are available in the circumstances?

Orders

  • A declaration that the 1st Defendant by purporting to assign his tenancy by occupancy to the 2nd Defendant on 13 August 2013 without first giving the first option to the Plaintiffs acted contrary to section 35(1) of the Land (Amendment) Act 2010.
  • A declaration that the 1st Defendant's Kibanja interest in the suit land is forfeited and reverts to the Plaintiffs as registered proprietors.
  • A declaration that all transactions in respect of the suit land by the 2nd Defendant are illegal.
  • A permanent injunction against the Defendants, their agents, assignees, transferees, successors in title or any person claiming from or through them from accessing, using and trespassing on the suit land.
  • General damages of UGX 50,000,000/= to be borne by the 2nd Defendant.
  • Costs of the suit.

Rules and key headnotes

Land Law — Tenancy by Occupancy — Sale of Kibanja Interest — Requirement to Offer First Option to Mailo Owner
A tenant by occupancy who wishes to sell his kibanja interest must first offer it to the registered mailo proprietor under section 35(1) of the Land (Amendment) Act 2010. Failure to comply with this statutory requirement renders the purported sale unlawful.
Contract Law — Capacity to Contract — Disqualification by Statute
A person who is disqualified from contracting by statute lacks capacity to contract under section 10(1)(c) of the Contracts Act. A tenant by occupancy who has not obtained the necessary consent from the registered proprietor under sections 35 and 36 of the Land Act is disqualified from contracting and any purported agreement of sale is not a valid contract within the meaning of section 9(1) of the Contracts Act.
Land Law — Tenancy by Occupancy — Forfeiture of Kibanja Interest — Consequence of Unlawful Sale
Where a tenant by occupancy sells his kibanja interest in breach of section 35(1) of the Land (Amendment) Act 2010, the kibanja interest is forfeited and reverts to the registered proprietors of the mailo land.
Land Law — Landlord and Tenant — Mailo Land — Relationship Between Mailo Owner and Tenant by Occupancy
The landlord/tenant relationship between a mailo owner and a tenant by occupancy is regulated by the Constitution and the Land Act. The mailo owner has superior title and legal possession, while the tenant by occupancy has physical possession. Any unauthorised entry on the land by the mailo owner amounts to trespass.

Legislation cited (7)

Cases cited (2)

  • Civil Suit No. 124 of 2008 in the Chief Magistrate's Court of Mpigi
  • Kafeero v Jaggwe (Civil Appeal No. 42 of 2012)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kafeero_and_Another_v_Jaggwe_and_Another_(civil_suit_no._431_2013)_[2025]_UGHCLD_192_(19_August_2025)
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.