Kiyengo and 2 Others v Byangire Asiimwe (Miscellaneous Application 33 of 2033)
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
Application for revocation of letters of administration dismissed. The court struck out two supplementary affidavits in reply filed outside the 15-day statutory period without leave. On the merits, the court found that the estate of the late Tito Byangire had already been distributed to beneficiaries pursuant to a consent judgment in Civil Suit No. 36 of 2020, and there was therefore no basis for revoking or granting fresh letters of administration.
Outcome
Application dismissed; estate already distributed pursuant to earlier consent judgment
Facts
The late Tito R. Byangire died on 29 August 1995. Letters of administration were granted to the Respondent, Moses Asiimwe Byangire, in 1996 under Probate and Administration Cause No. 141 of 1996. The Applicants, three biological children of the deceased, sought revocation of the letters on grounds that the Respondent had mismanaged the estate by selling property without consent, collecting rent without accounting, failing to perform his duties due to travel, and failing to file an inventory. The Respondent opposed the application, stating that the estate had been distributed pursuant to a consent judgment in Kampala High Court Civil Suit No. 36 of 2020 dated 17 February 2022, and there was nothing left to administer. The Respondent also filed two supplementary affidavits outside the prescribed time without seeking leave of court.
Issues
- Whether the supplementary affidavits in reply were filed out of time.
- Whether the letters of administration granted to the Respondent should be revoked on grounds of mismanagement of the estate.
Orders
- The two supplementary affidavits in reply filed by Mary Byangire Sendi and Byangire Alfred are struck out.
- The application is dismissed.
- No order as to costs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Succession Act Cap 162 s.234(2)(d)
- Succession Act Cap 162 s.234(2)(c)
- Succession Act Cap 162 s.234(2)(f)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.2
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3
- Civil Procedure Rules O.8 r.1(2)
Cases cited (3)
- Stop and See (U) Ltd v Tropical Africa Bank (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 333 of 2010)
- Patrick Sendyowa & Ors v Lucy Nakitto (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 1103 of 2018)
- Kampala High Court Civil Suit No. 36 of 2020
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.