Katumba David Mark & Ors v Aisha Infosys Limited & Anor (HC Civil Suit 416 of 2016)
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 High Court Land Division held that the plaintiffs failed to prove valid equitable interests in the disputed land, as their vendors' claims derived from an expired lease that had not been validly extended. The consent judgment in Civil Suit No. 787 of 2015 was entered fraudulently because the plaintiffs—who were in actual occupation and were evicted—were not parties to that suit and were condemned unheard. The first defendant was fraudulently registered as proprietor of plots 3480 and 3481, and that title is cancelled. The consent decree and eviction were irregular, entitling the plaintiffs to punitive damages.
Outcome
Suit succeeded in part; consent judgment set aside; fraudulent title cancelled; punitive damages awarded; land reverts to Buganda Land Board for corrective action and proper survey
Facts
The plaintiffs claimed to have purchased bibanja on land formerly comprised in Kyadondo Block 273, Plot 497, from beneficiaries of the late Yosiya Kizito, the original leaseholder whose lease expired in 1985. The original lease was not validly renewed. The land was later subdivided and registered in the names of new lessees. In 2015, the defendants entered a consent judgment in Civil Suit No. 787 of 2015 for vacant possession, without making the plaintiffs parties to that suit. The plaintiffs, who were in actual physical occupation, were evicted and their properties destroyed. They sought declarations of equitable interest, setting aside of the consent judgment, cancellation of the defendants' title for fraud, and damages. The defendants maintained they lawfully acquired the land through a chain of title from registered proprietors and that the plaintiffs' vendors had no valid claim since the original lease had expired.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiffs have equitable interests in the suit land formerly comprised in Kyadondo Block 273 Plot 497 situate at Bunamwaya.
- Whether the defendants fraudulently connived and registered the suit land into their names as land comprised in LRV 2420 Folio 8, plots 3479 and 3480 at Nyanama, Wakiso.
- Whether the defendants connived and fraudulently obtained the consent judgment vide Civil Suit No. 787 of 2015.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- The land formerly comprised in plot 497 Kyadondo Block 273 measuring 4.05 hectares did not constitute part of the estate of the late Yosiya Kizito Tabula.
- The plaintiffs did not acquire any valid or protectable interests in the suit land.
- The consent decree under Civil Suit No. 787 of 2015 dated 19th November 2015 was fraudulently entered into by the defendants since the plaintiffs were never parties to the suit and were never accorded the right to a fair hearing before their eviction from the land.
- M/s Aisha Infosys Ltd (1st defendant) was fraudulently registered on the land comprised in LRV 2420, block 273, plots 3480 and 3481, which title is therefore cancelled and reverts to Buganda Land Board (BLB) for proper allocation/validation of the lease, taking into account the interests of persons currently in physical occupation of those two plots.
- All titles created on the land comprised in plot 497 Kyadondo Block 273 are to be subjected to a proper survey to be caused by BLB for joint corrective action to be taken by BLB and Commissioner, Land Registration.
- The corrective action shall take into account the fact that M/s Alisha Investment Ltd has lawful interest in the land comprised in plot 3479 created out of the former Block 273, plot 497, which it acquired on 6th December 2010 from Muhindo Kalemire Jamal, late father to the 2nd defendant, even before the 2nd–5th plaintiffs purchased their respective portions of the bibanja on the suit land.
- The corrective action shall also take into account the current developments on the land by the persons who are in physical occupation of that land but who were not made party to this suit.
- Accordingly, the eviction by the defendants which was based on an irregular and improper order entitles the plaintiffs to a compound award of UGX 50,000,000/= as punitive damages against the defendants, to be divided equitably between the 2nd–5th plaintiffs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (21)
- Land Act s.29(2)(a)
- Land Act s.34
- Land Act s.35(1)
- Land Act s.35(2)
- Land Reform Decree 1975
- Land Reform Regulations 1976
- Public Lands Act 1969
- Traditional Rulers' Restitution of Assets and Properties Act
- Evidence Act s.101(1)
- Evidence Act s.102
- Evidence Act s.103
- Evidence Act s.106
- Registration of Titles Act s.59
- Registration of Titles Act s.176
- Contracts Act 2010 s.10(1)
- Contracts Act 2010 s.11(1)
- Contracts Act 2010 s.13
- Succession Act s.180
- Succession Act s.25
- Succession Act s.191
- Succession Act s.192
Cases cited (34)
- Nsubuga v Kanruma (1978) HCB 307
- Miller v Minister of Pensioners [1947] 2 372
- Sheikh Muhammed Lubowa v Kitara Enterprises Ltd (Court of Appeal No. 4 of 1987)
- Tagebwa Geoffrey and Anor v Kagimu Ngudde Mustafa (HC Civil Suit No. 778 of 2012)
- Justine E.M.N. Lutaaya v Sterling Civil Engineering Co (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2002)
- Erineo Lan Oto Ongom v Opoka Bosco and Anor (Civil Appeal No. 91 of 2019)
- Ponsiano Katamba v Cottilda Nakiriija (Civil Appeal No. 169 of 2011)
- Jonathan Masembe and 3 others v Makerere University & 2 others (Civil Suit No. 851 of 2000)
- Kampala District Land Board & George Mutale v Venansio Babutegala & Ors (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2001)
- Godfrey Ojwang v Wilson Bagonza (Court of Appeal No. 25 of 2002)
- Musisi Gabriel v Edeo Ltd & George Ragui Kamoi (High Court Land Division Appeal No. 52 of 2010)
- Sulelman Adriso v Rashido Abdul Karim Halani & Anor (Civil Suit No. 008 of 2011)
- Jennifer Nsubuga v Michael Mukundane and Anor (Civil Appeal No. 208 of 2018)
- Uganda Posts & Telecommunication v Abraham Kahunba (1997) IV ICALR 103
- Kaggwa v Kizito Batuma and 8 others (Civil Suit No. 286 of 2011)
- David Seliaka Nalima v Rebecca Musoke (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 12 of 1985)
- Fam International Ltd. and Ahmad Fareh v Mohamed El Fith [1994] KARL 902
- Sebuliba v Cooperative Bank Ltd. [1992] HCB 150
- Oketha v Attorney General (Civil Suit No. 0069 of 2004)
- Kampala Bottlers Ltd. v Damaniaeo (U) Ltd
- Ebbzworld Ltd & Anor v Rutakirua (Civil Suit No. 398 of 2013)
- William Kasozi v DFCU Bank Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 1326 of 2000)
- Silver Byaruhanga v Fr. Emmanuel Rurugaho and another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 09 of 2014)
- Udur v Ocaga & 3 Ors (Civil Appeal No. 34 of 2018)
- F.J K Zaabwe v Orient Bank & 5 Ors (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 2006)
- Trustees of Rubaga Miracle Centre v Mulangira Sibbwa (Miscellaneous Application No. 575 of 2006)
- Wassua v Moulders (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 645 of 2012)
- Makula International Ltd v H.E Cardinal Nsubuga & Anor (Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1981)
- Ahmed Termeye v Hassan Awdi & others (HC Civil Suit No. 95 of 2012)
- Dr. Diana Kanzira v Hebert Natukunda Rwanchuende and Anor (Civil Appeal No. 81 of 2020)
- Joyce Nakagima & 3 others v Nalumanasl Kalule and 2 others (Civil Appeal No. 111 of 2019)
- May v Brown Doering Mc NAB & Co. (1882) 2QB 128
- Kyagulanyi Coffee Ltd v Francis Senabulya (Civil Appeal No. 41 of 2006)
- R v Bukenya v Uganda [1922] EA 549
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.