Wakilii

Lucy Nsubuga v John Kajoba and Another [2026] UGHCLD 52

High Court · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application by chamber summons for leave to file an amended written statement of defence in a pending land suit ordered to be re-heard afresh
Decision
Leave to amend the written statement of defence granted; parties directed to file amended pleadings within fixed timelines ahead of the fresh hearing of Civil Suit No. 432 of 2008

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 granted the administrator pendente lite leave to amend her written statement of defence. Applying Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the criteria in Matagala Vincent v Uganda Revenue Authority, the court held the proposed amendment did not substitute a new cause of action or alter the subject matter of the suit, which remained ownership of the suit land, but merely clarified the defence by correcting averments allegedly made through former counsel's error. Mistakes of counsel should not ordinarily be visited on the litigant, and since the suit had been ordered to be heard afresh, no prejudice incapable of remedy arose. Timelines for amended pleadings were fixed; costs in the cause.

Outcome

Leave to amend the written statement of defence granted; parties directed to file amended pleadings within fixed timelines ahead of the fresh hearing of Civil Suit No. 432 of 2008

Facts

The Applicant is the widow of the late Bishop D. Nsubuga, one of the former registered proprietors of land at Mengo, Ndeeba comprised in Kibuga Block 7 Plots 749 and 750. The Respondents, joint administrators pendente lite of the estate of the late Evelyn (Evairini) Nachwa, sued her in Civil Suit No. 432 of 2008 alleging that the title had been fraudulently transferred from their mother's name. Two written statements of defence were filed on the Applicant's side by different law firms in December 2008, containing substantially different defences; one admitted that her late husband's signatures were forged and denied his registration. Judgment was entered against the estate, but was later set aside on review in Civil Application No. 115 of 2020, with an order that the suit be heard afresh inter partes, a position upheld by the Court of Appeal. The Applicant sought leave to amend the defence filed by M/S Ambrose Tebyasa & Co. Advocates to remove what she said were incorrect averments made through counsel's error. The Respondents opposed, contending the amendment was a complete departure from the original defence, made in bad faith and prejudicial.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to amend her written statement of defence under Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The application succeeds.
  • The Applicant shall file and serve an Amended Written Statement of Defence by 26th March 2026.
  • The Respondents shall file any amended pleadings or a rejoinder, if any, by 2nd April 2026.
  • Costs shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Discretion under Order 6 rule 19 CPR
The court may at any stage of the proceedings allow a party to alter or amend pleadings on such terms as may be just, and such an amendment should be allowed where it is necessary for determining the real question in controversy between the parties, causes no prejudice incapable of compensation by costs, does not substitute a distinct cause of action or change the subject matter of the suit, and is not made in bad faith or prohibited by law.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Correction of Averments Arising from Counsel's Error
A mistake of counsel should not ordinarily be visited upon the litigant, and a party may be permitted to amend pleadings in order to correct averments erroneously made by former counsel where the correction clarifies rather than replaces the existing defence.
Civil Procedure — Pleadings — Filing of Multiple Written Statements of Defence for the Same Party
The filing of two separate written statements of defence for the same party in the same suit is irregular, and a party should not maintain multiple defences in the same proceedings.
Civil Procedure — Retrial Ordered — Scope for Amendment of Pleadings Before Fresh Hearing
Where a judgment has been set aside and the suit ordered to be heard afresh inter partes on its merits, the parties may make amendments to their pleadings that are intended to enable the full disposal of the matter, and the opposing party may correspondingly be granted leave to amend or file a rejoinder.

Legislation cited (6)

  • Civil Procedure Act s.98
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.19
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.6 r.31
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.2
  • Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.3

Cases cited (5)

  • Modi Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd Vs Ladha Ram & Co. 1977 AIR 680
  • Ram Nirangan Kajaria Vs Heo Prukash Kajari & Ors 2015 AIR
  • Matagala Vincent v Uganda Revenue Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 25 of 2013)
  • Jayanth Amratlal Bhimji & Anor v Prime Finance Co. Ltd (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 225 of 2008)
  • Sepinja Kyamulesire v Justine Bikandulila Baganbe (Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1995)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Lucy Nsubuga v John Kajoba and Another [2026] UGHCLD 52 (18 March 2026)
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.