Wakilii

Kalema v Kalema 7 Anor (H.C.C.Suit No. 1474 of 2000)

High Court · [2007] UGHC 29 · 2007 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit following remittal from Court of Appeal
Decision
Counterclaim for intermeddling and trespass dismissed; plaintiff ordered to account for rental income; estate distribution to proceed

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 the suit property was not matrimonial property but rental premises constructed for revenue generation. The plaintiff, as co-administrator and beneficiary, could not be held liable for intermeddling or trespass under sections 268 and 272 of the Succession Act. The Court ordered the plaintiff to account for rental income collected from the property and directed the administrators to value the second defendant's proprietary interest in the land before distributing the estate. Costs were met from the estate.

Outcome

Counterclaim for intermeddling and trespass dismissed; plaintiff ordered to account for rental income; estate distribution to proceed

Facts

Martin Kalema died intestate on 7 August 1993, survived by his widow (the plaintiff), two children, his brother (first defendant), and his mother (second defendant). Letters of Administration were granted to the plaintiff and both defendants on 8 November 1993. The deceased had constructed two double-storey semi-detached houses on land registered in the second defendant's name (Plot 22B Nakasero Road). The houses were rented out to generate income. After the deceased's death, the plaintiff continued living in rented premises until September 1999, when she moved into the suit property. The defendants, as co-administrators, sought to evict her, claiming she was intermeddling with the estate. The plaintiff filed suit seeking a declaration that the property was her matrimonial home and a permanent injunction against eviction. A judgment on admission was entered after the plaintiff testified, but was appealed. The Court of Appeal set aside that judgment and remitted the matter for completion of trial.

Issues

  1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to occupy the suit property as her matrimonial home.
  2. Who is the owner of the suit property.
  3. Whether the plaintiff has intermeddled and continues to intermeddle in the estate of the late Martin Kalema.
  4. Whether the plaintiff is trespassing on the suit property.

Orders

  • The plaintiff shall give an account of all income accruing from the suit property from the time the deceased died to the time she started occupying the property, and account for income from one house from the time she took over to the date of judgment.
  • The administrators shall determine the monetary value of the second defendant's interest in the suit property and determine how she will benefit from this interest when the estate is finally distributed.
  • No orders as to damages.
  • Costs of the suit shall be met from the estate.

Rules and key headnotes

Administration of estates — Intermeddling — Co-administrator — Succession Act s.268 and s.272
An administrator of an estate cannot be accused of intermeddling in that estate by reason of the authority derived from the grant of Letters of Administration, even when acting without consultation with co-administrators, provided the actions fall within the scope of administration.
Administration of estates — Powers of co-administrators — Succession Act s.272
Where there are several administrators and no direction to the contrary, the powers of all may be exercised by any one of them who has taken out administration, enabling a single administrator to make decisions concerning the estate for the benefit of beneficiaries without collective consultation.
Matrimonial property — Widow's right to occupation — Property constructed for revenue generation
Property constructed by a deceased husband on land owned by another and used for generating rental income does not constitute matrimonial property entitling the widow to exclusive occupation, notwithstanding that the widow is a beneficiary and co-administrator of the estate.
Administration of estates — Duty to account — Succession Act s.278
An executor or administrator must exhibit an inventory within six months of the grant and a first account within one year, and file final accounts on completion of administration; a co-administrator who has collected estate income is required to account for all receipts to the estate.
Proprietary interest — Improvements on another's land — Rights of landowner
Where improvements are constructed on land owned by another with the landowner's permission, the landowner's proprietary interest as registered proprietor is not extinguished by the construction and must be honoured and protected in the distribution of the estate.

Legislation cited (4)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalema v Kalema 7 Anor (H.C.C.Suit No. 1474 of 2000) [2007] UGHC 29 (9 November 2007)
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.