Wakilii

Kananura Melvin Consulting Engineers & 7 Others v Kabanda (Civil Appeal 31 of 1992)

Supreme Court · [1992] UGSC 21 · 1992 Appeal Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Civil appeal from a High Court judgment for the plaintiff in a landlord and tenant suit for arrears of rent, damages and eviction.
Decision
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment and orders set aside; the respondent's claim against the appellants dismissed.

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 3 (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 3 times with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Citations fading — 3 citing cases on record, 3 in the most recent three data years. 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 Supreme Court allowed the appeal. Adding the partner-defendants was governed by Order 1 rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules, not Order 6 rule 19, and the new defendants were never served, so the misjoinder objection was well founded; counsel's statement from the bar could not prove their partnership. Having requested and received the second year's rent in advance, the respondent had commuted it and could not unilaterally increase it; the tenants, having paid all rent due, committed no breach and were not trespassers. The unstamped, uncertified copy tenancy agreement should have been rejected, and the special and aggravated damages were unproved. The High Court should have dismissed the claim.

Outcome

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment and orders set aside; the respondent's claim against the appellants dismissed.

Facts

The respondent, registered proprietor of a residential house at Kabalagala, leased it to the first appellant firm for three years from 11 August 1989 at Shs 120,000 per month, with a clause permitting review of rent every year. At the respondent's own request, the tenant paid the first two years' rent (Shs 2,880,000) in advance on execution of the agreement. On 30 April 1990 the respondent purported to raise the rent for the second year to Shs 450,000 per month with effect from 11 August 1990. The appellants refused, contending the rent had already been commuted and could not be increased. The respondent attempted distress and eviction, which the appellants resisted, and she then sued for arrears of rent, special damages (including payments to auctioneers), aggravated damages, an eviction order, interest and costs. The plaint, originally framed against the firm as a limited company, was amended to add seven partners as defendants. The trial judge found for the respondent on both framed issues.

Issues

  1. Whether appellants Nos. 2 to 7 were properly joined as defendants by an amended plaint, and whether the amendment and service complied with the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. Whether the respondent landlord was entitled to unilaterally increase the rent for the second year after she had requested and received that rent in advance.
  3. Whether an unstamped and uncertified photocopy of the tenancy agreement was admissible in evidence.
  4. Whether the special damages (payments to auctioneers) and aggravated damages were properly awarded.
  5. Whether the trial court properly dealt with the appellants' submission of no case to answer.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Judgment and orders of Bahigeine J set aside.
  • Costs of the appeal and in the court below awarded to the appellants.

Rules and key headnotes

Landlord and Tenant — Rent — Commutation by advance payment at landlord's instance
Where, at the landlord's request, a tenant pays rent in advance for a period not yet due, that rent is commuted and fixed, and the landlord cannot afterwards unilaterally increase it.
Tenancy — Breach — Tenant who has paid agreed rent
A tenant who has paid all rent agreed and due commits no breach of the tenancy and is not a trespasser, and may lawfully resist the landlord's attempted re-entry or eviction.
Parties — Addition of defendants — Applicable rule and service
The addition of defendants to a suit is governed by Order 1 rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, not Order 6 rule 19; under Order 1 rule 10(4) the amended plaint and summons must be served on the newly added defendants, and an amendment that does not comply should be rejected.
Statements from the bar — Inadmissibility to prove a contested fact
A statement of fact made by counsel from the bar is inadmissible, and no weight can be attached to it to establish a contested fact such as the existence of a partnership.
Documents — Unstamped lease and uncertified photocopy
Failure to stamp a lease renders it inadmissible until properly stamped, and an uncertified photocopy tendered without accounting for the original's absence should be rejected.
Special Damages — Strict pleading and proof
Special damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved; a court cannot award them on the pleadings alone where the claimant led no evidence on the claim and did not pursue it at trial.
Submission of no case to answer — Civil cases — Defendant's election
In a civil case, on a submission of no case to answer at the close of the plaintiff's case, the court must put the defendant to his election to call evidence; the submission should be refused unless the defendant elects to call none, there being no civil equivalent to s.71(1) of the Trial on Indictments Decree.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (5)

  • Kampala City Council v Nakaye [1972] EA 446
  • Vye v Vye [1969] 2 All ER 29
  • Yesevi v Golooba [1975] EA 125
  • Perry v Aluminium Corp [1940] WN 44
  • Fraser exparte of Central Bank of London 1892 QB 633 at 637

Cases citing this judgment (3)

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.

Kananura Melvin Consulting Engineers & 7 Others v Kabanda (Civil Appeal 31 of 1992) [1992] UGSC 21 (1 December 1992)
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.