Kisoke and Another v Katalihwa (Miscellaneous Application No. 74 of 2022)

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.

Holding

Application for stay of execution pending appeal and for setting aside partial execution dismissed. Court held that applicants failed to establish their current possession status or controvert respondent's evidence that execution was already concluded. Applicants' affidavit evidence was contradictory and insufficient to demonstrate substantial loss or that execution remained incomplete. Complaints about the execution process should be taken to the executing court.

Outcome

Application dismissed; execution process deemed concluded

Facts

Applicants were sued in land matter KJJO-00-CV-LD-NO.008 of 2016 and judgment was entered against them. They appealed to the High Court vide Civil Appeal No. 020 of 2021. Meanwhile, respondent obtained execution orders including eviction warrant and committal to civil prison. First applicant was released from prison on health grounds; second applicant remained in prison. Applicants had earlier filed Misc. Appl. No. 05 of 2022 in the Magistrates Court seeking stay of execution which was dismissed on 20 June 2022. The Magistrates Court had conducted locus visit on 10 June 2022 and observed applicants had crops that would be harvested before eviction date of 28 July 2022. Applicants then filed present application in High Court seeking to set aside partial execution and stay further execution pending appeal.

Issues

1. Whether the applicants satisfied the necessary grounds for grant of stay of execution pending appeal.
2. Whether the partial execution should be set aside for being unlawful.

Orders

• Application dismissed.
• No order as to costs.

Legislation cited (7)

• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.16(1)
• Judicature Act Cap 13 s.33
• Civil Procedure Act s.98
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 43 r.22(1)(b)
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.1
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 r.3
• Civil Procedure Rules Order 43 r.4(3)

Cases cited (5)

• Lawrence Musiitwa Kyazze v Eunice Busingye (SC Civil Application No. 18 of 1990)
• Tropical Commodities Supplies Ltd & 2 Others v International Credit Bank Ltd (in Liquidation) [2004] 2 EA 337
• Gapco Uganda Ltd v Kaweesa & Another (MA No. 259 of 2013)
• Sewankambo Dickson v Ziwa Abby (HCMCA No. 0178 of 2005)
• Wagar Singh v Runda Coffee Estates Ltd [1966] EA 263

Cases citing this judgment (2)

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.

• Bank of Uganda v Petronila Kakayi and Another (Miscellaneous Application 30 of 2025)
• Mujungu v Mbaju (Miscellaneous Application 3 of 2023)

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