Wakilii

Katarikawe & Ors v Turyamureeba (Miscellaneous Application No. 0169 of 2013)

High Court · [2014] UGHCCD 108 · 2014 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Miscellaneous application arising from earlier civil suit seeking order for account against respondent who allegedly collected compensation on applicants' behalf
Decision
Application struck out with costs to the respondent

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 held that an application for account under Order 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules must arise from a suit on plaint and cannot be brought as a standalone miscellaneous application. Without a plaint praying for an account, the application is incompetent. The court further held that the application was time-barred under the Limitation Act, having been filed more than six years after the alleged cause of action arose in 2004.

Outcome

Application struck out with costs to the respondent

Facts

Nine applicants were part of 133 plaintiffs who successfully sued Kabarole District Local Council and the Attorney General in HCCS No. 207 of 1993, with each plaintiff awarded UGX 12 million plus interest. In 2000, the applicants gave the respondent power of attorney to represent them. The applicants alleged that the respondent collected UGX 17,133,946,000 on their behalf from the Attorney General but failed to account for it. They claimed the respondent formed a fictitious group called MECCABDA in 2004 to collect and misappropriate their compensation. The applicants sought an order compelling the respondent to account for monies received.

Issues

  1. Whether an application for account under Order 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules can be brought as a miscellaneous application without a pending suit founded on a plaint.
  2. Whether the application was barred by limitation under section 3 of the Limitation Act.

Orders

  • Application struck out.
  • Costs awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Applications for Account — Requirement of Plaint
An application for account under Order 20 of the Civil Procedure Rules presupposes the existence of a plaint in which the plaintiff prays for an account; without a pending suit founded on a plaint, such an application is incompetent and must be struck out.
Statutory Interpretation — Civil Procedure Rules — Order 20 Rule 1
The clear wording of Order 20 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules requires that for an application for account to be tenable, the relief must be sought in a plaint; the court has no jurisdiction to entertain arguments on taking of accounts when no such prayer was made in a plaint.
Civil Procedure — Limitation — Actions Founded on Tort
Under section 3(1) of the Limitation Act, actions founded on contract or tort must be brought within six years from the date on which the cause of action arose; an application filed more than six years after the alleged wrongful act is time-barred.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (2)

  • National Bank of Kenya Ltd v Pipeplastig Samkolit (K) Ltd & Another [2002] 2 EA 495
  • Bhatia v Crane Bank Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 459 of 2002)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Katarikawe & Ors v Turyamureeba (Miscellaneous Application No. 0169 of 2013) [2014] UGHCCD 108 (28 August 2014)
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.