Wakilii

Kayima v Commissioner Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause 343 of 2023)

High Court · [2024] UGHCLD 273 · 2024 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for a vesting order under section 167 (now section 151) of the Registration of Titles Act
Decision
Application dismissed as premature and incompetent for failure to first apply to the Registrar of Titles

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

Held that an application for a vesting order under section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act must first be made to the Registrar/Commissioner for Land Registration. Only after the Registrar declines to exercise the statutory power may an applicant invoke the court's inherent jurisdiction. Where the applicant adduced no proof of a prior application to the Registrar's office, the court lacks jurisdiction and the application is premature and incompetent. Application dismissed.

Outcome

Application dismissed as premature and incompetent for failure to first apply to the Registrar of Titles

Facts

The applicant claimed to have purchased land comprised in Busiro Block 378 Plot 1000 from Andrew SB Lubega in 2010 for UGX 49,000,000. He alleged he paid the full purchase price, received duplicate certificates of title and transfer forms, and took uninterrupted possession. He stated he unintentionally lost the signed transfer form and could not locate the vendor to obtain fresh transfer forms. The land remained registered in the vendor's name. The applicant sought a vesting order directing the Commissioner for Land Registration to transfer the property into his name. The respondent opposed the application on grounds that it was brought using the wrong procedure and that the applicant had not first applied to the Registrar's office as required by statute.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant has established sufficient grounds to be issued a vesting order in the suit property.
  2. Whether the application is competent where the applicant has not first applied to the Registrar of Titles before invoking the court's jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Application dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Vesting Orders — Statutory Procedure — Requirement to Apply to Registrar First
An application for a vesting order under section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act must first be made to the Registrar/Commissioner for Land Registration, who must decline to exercise the statutory power, before an applicant may invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
Jurisdiction — Premature Applications — Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies
Where a statute vests power to deal with a matter in an administrative officer, and the applicant has not adduced proof of having first applied to that officer, the court application is premature and incompetent, and the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain it.
Vesting Orders — Conditions for Grant under Section 167 Registration of Titles Act
For a vesting order to be granted under section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act, the following conditions must be fulfilled: the land must be registered under the Act and the purchaser must have paid the whole purchase price; the purchaser or those claiming under him must have taken possession; the vendor or his representative must have acquiesced in that possession; and the transfer has not been executed because the vendor is dead, residing out of jurisdiction, or cannot be found.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (4)

  • Re Ivan Mutaka (1980) HCB 27
  • Aida Najjemba v Esther Mpagi (Court of Appeal No. 74 of 2005)
  • Michael Kaggwa v Paulina Nampiso (Originating Summons No. 11 of 2012)
  • Ronald One v Commissioner for Land Registration (Miscellaneous Cause No. 90 of 2013)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kayima_v_Commissioner_Land_Registration_(Miscellaneous_Cause_343_of_2023)_[2024]_UGHCLD_273_(22_November_2024)
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.