Wakilii

Kumar & Another v Kumar (Civil Suit 1098 of 2022)

High Court · [2024] UGCOMMC 139 · 2024 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for recovery of money lent, heard ex parte after Defendant failed to appear despite service
Decision
The Defendant is ordered to pay the Plaintiffs AED 295,438.466 as principal debt, AED 15,000 as general damages, plus interest and costs

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 court held that the Plaintiffs proved by evidence including bank transfers, cheques, cash deposits, and WhatsApp messages that they lent the Defendant AED 295,438.466 between 2018 and 2021. The Defendant's failure to repay constituted unjust enrichment. The court awarded the principal sum, general damages of AED 15,000 for anguish and depression caused to the Plaintiffs, and interest from filing and judgment respectively.

Outcome

The Defendant is ordered to pay the Plaintiffs AED 295,438.466 as principal debt, AED 15,000 as general damages, plus interest and costs

Facts

The Plaintiffs lent the Defendant AED 295,438.466 between 2018 and December 2021 after the Defendant approached them with a business opportunity in Uganda. The money was transferred through various modes including cheques, direct cash, cash deposits, and account transfers. The Defendant promised repayment in early 2022 and issued postdated cheques, but these bounced. A criminal case in the UAE found in the Plaintiffs' favour regarding the dishonoured cheques. Evidence showed the Defendant became a shareholder and director in Azzurra Minerals Ltd in Uganda during the loan period. After service of the suit, the Defendant contacted the Plaintiffs via WhatsApp promising payment. The second Plaintiff went into depression due to the Defendant's failure to repay. The matter proceeded ex parte as the Defendant failed to appear despite service.

Issues

  1. Whether the Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiffs.
  2. Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to the remedies sought.

Orders

  • Judgment entered for the Plaintiffs.
  • The sum of AED 295,438.466 being money owed to the Plaintiffs awarded.
  • General damages of AED 15,000 awarded.
  • Interest of 15% on the principal sum from the date of filing the suit until payment in full.
  • Interest of 20% on general damages from the date of judgment until payment in full.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiffs.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Burden of Proof — Shifting of Burden — Unrebutted Evidence
Where a plaintiff adduces evidence sufficient to raise a presumption that what is asserted is true, the burden shifts to the defendant, and unless the defendant adduces evidence to rebut the presumption, it will be presumed to be true.
Contract Law — Money Lent — Proof of Debt — Documentary Evidence
In an action for recovery of money lent, a plaintiff may prove the debt through multiple forms of documentary evidence including bank statements, cheques, direct transfer records, cash deposit slips, and electronic communications such as WhatsApp messages acknowledging receipt.
Commercial Law — Unjust Enrichment — Liability for Money Had and Received
In an action for money had and received, liability is based on unjust benefit or enrichment. The action is applicable whenever the defendant has received money which, in justice and equity, belongs to the plaintiff. Unjust enrichment means a benefit obtained from another, not intended as a gift and not legally justifiable, for which the beneficiary must make restitution.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Assessment Principles
In assessing general damages, the court must be guided by the value of the subject matter, the economic inconvenience that the plaintiff has been put through, and the nature and extent of the injury suffered. A plaintiff who suffers damage due to the wrongful act of the defendant must be put in the position they would have been in had they not suffered the wrong.
Damages & Quantum — General Damages — Depression and Anguish
General damages may be awarded for anguish and depression caused by a defendant's failure to repay a loan where medical evidence supports the claim that the plaintiff suffered depression as a result of the defendant's conduct.

Cases cited (8)

  • Kyotera Victoria Fishnets Ltd v Commissioner General, URA (Civil Suit No. 224 of 2014)
  • Dr. James Kashugyera Tumwine and Another v Sr. Willie Magara and Another (HCCS No. 576 of 2004)
  • Adonia Tumusiime and 318 Others v Bushenyi District Local Government and Another (HCCS No. 32 of 2012)
  • James Fredrick Nsubuga v Attorney General (HCCS No. 13 of 1993)
  • Uganda Commercial Bank v Kigozi [2002] 1 EA 305
  • Charles Acire v Mgaana Engola (HCCS No. 143 of 1993)
  • Kibimba Rice Ltd v Umar Salim (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 1992)
  • Maruri Venkata Bhaskar Reddy v Bank of India (Uganda) Ltd (Civil Suit No. 804 of 2014)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Kumar & Another v Kumar (Civil Suit 1098 of 2022) [2024] UGCommC 139 (13 May 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.