Wakilii

Kasasira Mutabazi and 5 Others v Kiwanuka Wakabi and Another (miscellaneous Application no.1127 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCLD 114 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Interlocutory application for leave to amend plaint arising from pending civil suit
Decision
Application for leave to amend plaint dismissed with costs to respondents

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 dismissed an application for leave to amend a plaint to increase the claimed land value from UGX 613 million to UGX 812 million solely on grounds of time passing. The court held that such amendment was mala fide and an abuse of process, as land naturally appreciates over time and the proper course is to present valuation evidence at trial rather than repeatedly amending pleadings.

Outcome

Application for leave to amend plaint dismissed with costs to respondents

Facts

The applicants filed Civil Suit No. 685 of 2022 claiming compensation for land valued at UGX 613,000,000. Subsequently, they brought this interlocutory application seeking leave to amend the plaint to increase the claimed value to UGX 812,000,000, stating that the value had increased due to effluxion of time and presenting a new valuation report. The first respondent opposed the application, arguing that the applicant lacked standing and proper qualifications to depose the supporting affidavit. The respondents contended that the application was brought in bad faith to delay proceedings, particularly as the applicants had already obtained temporary injunctive relief and the suit property was deteriorating while the case was delayed.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicants should be granted leave to amend the plaint to increase the claimed compensation value from UGX 613,000,000 to UGX 812,000,000 on grounds of effluxion of time.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Amendment of Pleadings — Principles Governing Exercise of Discretion
Under Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has discretion to allow amendment of pleadings at any stage of proceedings, but this discretion must be exercised in accordance with established principles: the amendment must not work injustice to the other side that cannot be compensated by costs; multiplicity of proceedings should be avoided; applications made mala fide should not be granted; and no amendment should be allowed where expressly or impliedly prohibited by law.
Amendment of Pleadings — Mala Fide Applications — Abuse of Process
An application to amend a plaint solely to increase the claimed value of land on grounds that time has passed and land naturally appreciates is mala fide and an abuse of court process, as it is common knowledge that land increases in value over time and the proper course is to present expert valuation evidence at trial rather than repeatedly amending pleadings to reflect market changes.
Amendment of Pleadings — Valuation Evidence — Proper Procedure
Where the value of land has increased between the filing of a suit and trial, the proper procedure is for a party to present a witness at the opportune time who can attest to the increment in value, rather than seeking to amend the pleadings to reflect the increased valuation.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (3)

  • Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Obene (1990-1994) EA 88
  • Mulowooza & Brothers Ltd v Shah & Co Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2010)
  • Nicholas Serunkuma Ssewagudde and 2 Others v Namasole Namusoke Namatovu Veronica (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 1307 of 2016)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kasasira_Mutabazi_and_5_Others_v_Kiwanuka_Wakabi_and_Another_(miscellaneous_Application_no.1127_2025)_[2025]_UGHCLD_114_(27_June_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.