Kiteme v Twesigye and Others (Civil Suit 2212 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
Held that where two certificates of title exist for the same parcel of land, the first registered legal interest takes priority. The plaintiff, registered in 1999, had priority over the 1st defendant registered in 2007. The 1st defendant's certificate of title was fraudulently obtained and must be cancelled. The 1st defendant was a trespasser. The 2nd defendant mortgagee was not liable as they conducted a proper search and were unaware of the fraud. General damages of UGX 20,000,000 awarded to the plaintiff.
Outcome
Plaintiff's suit against 1st defendant succeeded. 1st defendant's certificate of title cancelled. Permanent injunction granted. Suit against 2nd and 3rd defendants dismissed.
Facts
The plaintiff was registered proprietor of land at Kilinya (Plot 1320) since 1999. She purchased the land in 1988 and began constructing rental units in 2002. In 2015, the plaintiff discovered that the 1st defendant had mortgaged the same land to the 2nd defendant using a different certificate of title (Plot 310) registered in 2007. The 1st defendant defaulted on the loan and the 2nd defendant advertised the property for sale. Both certificates of title were verified as authentic by the Commissioner for Land Registration, creating a double titling scenario. The 1st defendant claimed to have purchased the land in 2006 from Mpooya Seith for UGX 50 million but never took possession despite rental units being present. A locus in quo visit confirmed the plaintiff was in complete occupation of the land with rental units.
Issues
- Whether the 1st and 2nd defendants trespassed on the suit property?
- Whether the 3rd defendant is liable for any wrong doing?
- Whether there are any remedies available to the parties?
Orders
- Declaration that the 1st defendant (Roseline Niwamanya Twesigye) is a trespasser on land comprised in Kyadondo Block 234 Plot 1320 Land at Kilinya.
- Order directing the Commissioner for Land Registration to cancel the certificate of title for land comprised in Kyadondo Block 234 Plot 310 Land at Kilinya.
- Permanent injunction restraining the 1st defendant, her servants, agents, and any other person acting on her behalf, from further trespass on land comprised in Kyadondo Block 234 Plot 1320 Land at Kilinya.
- Order directing the 1st defendant to pay general damages of UGX 20,000,000 to the plaintiff.
- Interest of 25% per annum on general damages from the date of judgment until payment in full.
- Order directing the 1st defendant to pay the costs of the suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
Cases cited (6)
- Lutaya v Stirling Civil Engineering Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)
- Kampala District Land Board & Chemical Distributors v National Housing and Construction Corporation (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 2004)
- Lamwaka Lucy v Laloyo Jalon (High Court Civil Appeal No. 31 of 2017)
- Vivo Energy (U) Ltd v Shire Petroleum Company Ltd & 2 Others (High Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2016)
- Mohammed Abdallah Garelnabi v Diana Irene Nayiga (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 231 of 2019)
- St Mark Educational Centre Limited v Makerere University (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 40 of 1997)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.