Wakilii

Kalori v Kalongoli and Others (Misc. App. No. 00254 2011)

High Court · [2012] UGHC 465 · 2012 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for temporary injunction arising out of civil suit concerning land administration and estate matters
Decision
Temporary injunction granted pending determination of the main suit

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 court granted a temporary injunction restraining the respondents from dealing with or alienating land comprised in Block 222 (formerly plots 96, 2099, 2353) and restraining the Registrar of Titles from effecting any changes to the title. The court was satisfied that there were serious triable issues to be investigated on both sides, the suit was not frivolous, and the applicant would suffer irreparable damage if the land were alienated before disposal of the main suit. The injunction was to remain in force until the determination of Civil Suit No. 102 of 2011.

Outcome

Temporary injunction granted pending determination of the main suit

Facts

The applicant claimed to be the registered proprietor of suit land until 2006 as administrator of the estate of late Benedict Sajjabi. The applicant alleged he was the only child born out of wedlock and therefore the only beneficiary of the deceased's estate. He contended that the 4th respondent, in connivance with other respondents, stole his certificate of title to the suit estate and were in the process of alienating the estate, thereby denying him his interest in the land. The applicant filed Civil Suit No. 102/2011 and sought citation of the letters of probate granted to the 1st respondent. He applied for a temporary injunction to preserve the status quo pending determination of the main suit.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant satisfied the conditions for the grant of a temporary injunction.
  2. Whether the applicant demonstrated a prima facie case with triable issues.
  3. Whether the applicant would suffer irreparable damage if the respondents were not restrained from dealing with the suit land.

Orders

  • Application allowed.
  • Temporary injunction granted restraining the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th respondents and their agents, servants and employees from any dealing in or carrying out any developments on land comprised in Block 222 formerly plots 96, 2099, 2353 and any other which might have arisen out of the original plot 96 until Civil Suit No. 102/2011 is heard and determined.
  • Temporary injunction granted restraining the 6th respondent and her agents, servants and employees from effecting any changes on the title of land comprised in formerly plots 96, 2099, 2353 and any other which might have arisen out of the original plot 96 until Civil Suit No. 102/2011 is heard and determined.
  • The temporary injunction shall remain in force until the suit is heard and disposed of.
  • Costs of the application provided for.
  • Affidavit in reply of the 1st respondent struck off the record.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Temporary Injunctions — Test for Grant — Prima Facie Case
There is no rule that an applicant for a temporary injunction must first establish a prima facie case as this would lead to the trial of the suit without evidence. It is sufficient to show that there are triable issues to be investigated on either side and that the suit is not frivolous.
Civil Procedure — Temporary Injunctions — Irreparable Damage — Alienation of Property
An applicant proves that he would suffer irreparable damage where there is anticipatory concern that if land is disposed of before final disposal of the main suit, there would be nothing of value left for compensation.
Civil Procedure — Temporary Injunctions — Purpose — Preservation of Status Quo
The purpose of a temporary injunction is to preserve the status quo pending the determination of the main suit on its merits.
Civil Procedure — Affidavits — Striking Off — Non-Appearance for Cross-Examination
Where a respondent who has filed an affidavit in reply fails to appear in court for cross-examination despite adjournments granted to accommodate him, the court may strike off the affidavit from the record.

Legislation cited (3)

Cases cited (2)

  • Mohammed Yahu v Abdur Khamis (HCCC No. 217 of 1994)
  • Kiyimba Kagwa v Haji Abdu Nasser Katende [1983] HCB 45

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalori v Kalongoli and Others (Misc. App. No. 00254_2011) [2012] UGHC 465 (6 March 2012)
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.