Karuhanga Agnes v Rwihura Asaph (Civil Suit No. 94 of 2023)
Observed later treatment
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 High Court held that the defendant breached a land sale agreement by failing to pay the agreed purchase price of UGX 130,000,000 in instalments as stipulated, and that his actions amounted to fraud. The court ordered cancellation of the defendant's registration and reinstatement of the plaintiff as registered proprietor, awarded general damages of UGX 20,000,000, and granted costs.
Outcome
Judgment entered in favour of the Plaintiff; defendant's registration to be cancelled and plaintiff reinstated as registered proprietor; general damages and costs awarded
Facts
On 15 November 2022, the plaintiff agreed to sell land to the defendant for UGX 130,000,000, payable in instalments: UGX 30,000,000 within four days of transfer and UGX 100,000,000 by 10 December 2022. The plaintiff handed over the certificate of title and transfer documents, and the land was transferred into the defendant's names on 22 November 2022. The defendant failed to pay either instalment. The sale agreement provided that upon failure to pay, the defendant would return the certificate of title and transfer documents. On 20 December 2022, the plaintiff served a notice of termination, but the defendant refused to return the documents. The defendant did not appear for most hearing sessions, and the matter proceeded exparte.
Issues
- Whether the Defendant breached the terms of the land sale agreement dated 15th November, 2022?
- Whether the actions of the Defendant amounted to fraud?
- Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought?
Orders
- The Defendant breached the terms of the land sale agreement dated 15th November, 2022.
- The Plaintiff is the lawful owner of land comprised in Kyadondo, Block No. 185, Plot No. 2150, Land at Namugongo, Mengo District measuring approximately 0.057 hectares.
- The Defendant shall within one month hand over to the Plaintiff the original duplicate certificate of title with duly signed transfer forms, passport size photograph and copy of national identity card.
- If the Defendant fails to comply within the time period, the Commissioner Land Registration shall cancel the Defendant's entry from the land register and reinstate the Plaintiff's names.
- The Commissioner Land Registration shall issue to the Plaintiff a special certificate of title in the Plaintiff's names as registered proprietor.
- The Plaintiff is awarded general damages of UGX 20,000,000.
- Interest at 8% per annum on general damages from date of judgment until payment in full.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (10)
- Evidence Act Cap 8 s.101
- Evidence Act Cap 8 s.102
- Evidence Act Cap 8 s.103
- Contracts Act Cap 284 s.9(1)
- Contracts Act Cap 284 s.47(1)
- Contracts Act Cap 284 s.53(1)
- Contracts Act Cap 284 s.60(1)
- Registration of Titles Act Cap 240 s.177
- Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 s.98
- Prevention and Prohibition of Torture Act Cap 130
Cases cited (6)
- United Building Services Ltd v Yates Muskarat T/A Quickset Builders & Co (HCCS No. 154 of 2005)
- Fredrick Zaabwe v Orient Bank & others (SCCA No. 4 of 2006)
- Campuline Mukisa & Another v Lutwama Henry Ssalongo (HCCS No. 682 of 2018)
- Crown Beverages Ltd v Sendu Edward (SCCA No. 1 of 2005)
- Robert Coussens v Attorney General (SCCA No. 8 of 1999)
- Livingstone v Ronoyard's Coal Co (1880) 5 App Cas 259
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
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.