Wakilii

Lakidi & 6 Others v Okullo & Another (Originating Summons 5 of 2021)

High Court · [2021] UGHCFD 228 · 2021 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Originating Summons seeking enforcement of testamentary wishes and orders directing the executor to transfer estate property to beneficiaries
Decision
Executor ordered to transfer estate property into the names of all beneficiaries and hand over all remaining estate property; executor barred from further interference with estate property

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 application was properly brought by Originating Summons as the questions raised were non-contentious. The court ordered the executor to transfer Block 216 Plot 1270 into the names of all nine children of the deceased as per the testator's will, which directed that the property remain undivided and be used for the benefit of all children. The executor was ordered to deliver the Special Certificate of Title to court and was barred from interfering with estate property.

Outcome

Executor ordered to transfer estate property into the names of all beneficiaries and hand over all remaining estate property; executor barred from further interference with estate property

Facts

The deceased, Odong Lakidi, died leaving a will dated 5 February 1996 in which he bequeathed land comprised in Block 216 Plot 1270 at Buye to all his children for their benefit. Clause 3 of the will directed that the property remain undivided and be used to generate income for the educational maintenance and welfare of his children. The deceased appointed his brother James Okullo as executor. Probate was granted to the executor on 3 July 2015. The executor failed to transfer the property into the names of the beneficiaries as directed by the will. Seven of the deceased's nine children brought an originating summons seeking orders compelling the executor to transfer the property to all the children. The executor opposed on grounds that the application was contentious and proposed a sharing plan dividing the property into portions, contrary to the testator's express direction that the land remain intact.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is properly before court by way of Originating Summons.
  2. Whether James Okullo, the executor of the estate of the late Odong Lakidi, should be ordered to transfer land comprised in Block 216 Plot 1270 situate at Buye into the names of the children of the late Odong Lakidi in accordance with the will.
  3. Whether James Okullo should be ordered to deliver up in court the Special Certificate of Title for the land comprised in Block 216 Plot 1270, signed transfer forms, passport photos and identification documents for purposes of transfer.
  4. Whether, in the alternative, the Commissioner for Land Registration should be ordered to issue a Certificate of Title into the names of the beneficiaries in accordance with the testamentary wishes.

Orders

  • The 1st defendant, James Okullo, is ordered to transfer the suit land comprised in Block 216 Plot 1270 land at Buye into ALL the names of the children of the deceased, the late Odong Lakidi, as per his testamentary wishes under clause 3 of the will.
  • The 1st defendant, James Okullo, is ordered to deliver up the Special Certificate of Title for the suit land in court on the 7th day of December 2021 together with signed transfer forms, passport photos and identification documents for purposes of transfer of the suit land.
  • The Grant of Probate issued vide Administration Cause No. 957 of 2014 on 3rd July 2015 will be rendered inoperative upon transfer of the suit land into the names of the beneficiaries.
  • The 1st defendant is directed to trace Atim and Labongo Kenneth, the other beneficiaries who are unknown to the plaintiffs, for purposes of completing the process of registration of the suit property into the names of all the beneficiaries.
  • The 1st defendant is ordered to hand over to all the children of the deceased any other remaining property not yet properly disposed of since they are now of age and capable of managing their own affairs.
  • The 1st defendant is barred from interfering in any way with the suit land and any other remaining property of the deceased that was left for the benefit of all the children of the deceased.
  • The costs of this suit shall be borne by the 1st defendant.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Originating Summons — Scope of Order 37 CPR — When matters are properly brought by Originating Summons
An application seeking an order compelling an executor to perform duties under a will where the facts are not contested and the questions raised are simple and straightforward may properly be brought by way of Originating Summons under Order 37 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Succession & Estates — Executors — Duties — Testamentary wishes — Requirement to administer estate in accordance with will
An executor has a duty to administer the estate in accordance with the testator's testamentary wishes as expressed in the will. Where the terms of the will are clear, the executor may not substitute his or her own judgment as to the best manner of distribution or administration.
Succession & Estates — Executors — Powers under Succession Act ss.180 and 270 — Limits on executor's discretion where will is clear
The powers conferred on an executor by sections 180 and 270 of the Succession Act to hold and dispose of estate property do not empower the executor to distribute the estate contrary to the testator's express directions where the will is clear as to how the property should be treated or distributed.
Succession & Estates — Wills — Interpretation — Property to remain undivided for benefit of all beneficiaries
Where a testator devises property to all his children and declares that the property shall not be sold by whosoever has management but may be used to generate income for the benefit of the children, the testator's intention is that the property remain intact and be used for the benefit of all children equally without division.

Legislation cited (9)

Cases cited (5)

  • Sserunjogi Charles Musoke & Another v Tony Nkuumbi (Originating Summons No. 7 of 2019)
  • Kulsumbai Gulam Hussein Jaffer Ramji and Another Versus Abdul Hussein Jaffer Mohamed Rahim, Executor of Gulam Hussein Jaffer Ramji, Secretary, Wakf Commissioners, Zanzibar and others [1957] 1 EA 699 (HCZ)
  • Joyce Carol Nsubuga & 2 Others v Christine Nsubuga (Originating Summons No. 7 of 2014)
  • Re Giles (2) (1890), 43 Ch. D. 391
  • Gulaballi Ushitlani v Kampala Pharmaceuticals Ltd (High Court Civil Suit No. 6 of 1998)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Lakidi & 6 Others v Okullo & Another (Originating Summons 5 of 2021) [2021] UGHCFD 228 (30 November 2021)
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.