Wakilii

Kalumba James Buuzabalyawo v John Bosco Butaleeba (Civil Suit No. 87 of 2019)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 1109 · 2025 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass and declaration of ownership, proceeding exparte against the defendant
Decision
Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff; defendant declared a trespasser and ordered to be evicted from the suit land

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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 High Court held that the plaintiff, as registered proprietor of land comprised in Mawokota Block 183 Plot 25, proved ownership on the balance of probabilities. The defendant, who failed to participate in the proceedings, was found to be a trespasser having entered the land without permission, moved boundary markers, and planted eucalyptus trees without consent or proof of any kibanja rights. The court granted a declaration of ownership, an eviction order, a permanent injunction, and general damages of UGX 5,000,000.

Outcome

Judgment entered in favour of the plaintiff; defendant declared a trespasser and ordered to be evicted from the suit land

Facts

The plaintiff is the registered proprietor and administrator of land comprised in Mawokota Block 183 Plot 25 at Bulembo, formerly belonging to the late Yozefu Ssebayiga. In May 2017, the defendant, who claimed to have a kibanja on the suit land, extended his boundaries by planting mark stones on the plaintiff's land. The defendant claimed ownership based on a fictitious grave and, during the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, cleared part of the land and planted eucalyptus trees. The defendant's trespass continued, preventing the plaintiff from accessing his land. The defendant did not participate in the proceedings and adduced no evidence of ownership, payment of busulu, or consent from the landlord. A locus visit on 7 March 2024 found no grave sites as claimed by the defendant.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant is a trespasser on part of the suit land?
  2. Whether the plaintiff is the lawful and bonafide owner of the suit land?
  3. Whether the defendant has any equitable interest in the land?
  4. Whether the defendant fraudulently acquired part of the suit land?
  5. What remedies are available to the parties?

Orders

  • A declaration that the plaintiff is the lawful owner of the suit land.
  • A declaration that the defendant is a trespasser on the suit land comprised in Mawokota Block 183, Plot 25 situate at Bulembo.
  • An eviction order is hereby issued against the defendant.
  • A permanent injunction doth issue restraining the defendant from ever trespassing onto the plaintiff's land or claiming ownership of any part of the suit land.
  • General damages to a tune of UGX 5,000,000/= are hereby awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Costs of the suit are awarded to the plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass to Land — Elements of Proof
To succeed in an action for trespass to land, a plaintiff must prove that the disputed land belonged to the plaintiff, that the defendant entered upon it, and that the entry was unlawful in that it was made without permission or that the defendant had no claim, right, or interest in the disputed land.
Registered Proprietorship — Proof of Ownership
A registered proprietor who presents an original certificate of title establishes prima facie proof of ownership of the suit land, and in the absence of any countervailing evidence from the defendant, the court will find ownership proved on the balance of probabilities.
Burden of Proof — Civil Proceedings
In civil proceedings, the burden of proof lies upon he who alleges, and the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. The plaintiff must prove the existence of facts upon which any legal right or liability depends.
Exparte Proceedings — Effect of Defendant's Non-Participation
Where a defendant chooses not to participate in the hearing of a case, the plaintiff's evidence and allegations remain unchallenged, and the court may resolve all issues in favour of the plaintiff if the plaintiff has discharged the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities.

Legislation cited (2)

Cases cited (3)

  • Justine E.M.N Lutaaya v Sterling Civil Engineering Co. (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
  • Sheikh Muhammad Lubowa v Kitara Enterprises Ltd (Court of Appeal No. 4 of 1987)
  • Erukana Kuwe v Issac Patrick Matovu and Another (High Court Civil Suit No. 177 of 2003)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kalumba James Buuzabalyawo v John Bosco Butaleeba (Civil Suit No. 87 of 2019) [2025] UGHC 1109 (25 September 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.