Wakilii

M/s Bahesco Company Limited v National Forestry Authority and Others (Civil Suit No. 16 of 2009)

High Court · [2022] UGHCCD 147 · 2022 Judgment for Defendant AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Consolidated civil suits: first instance claim for trespass and eviction by Bahesco against NFA (CS 16/2009), and counterclaim by NFA seeking cancellation of title and declaration of management rights over forest reserve (CS 16/2011)
Decision
Plaintiff's claim for trespass and eviction dismissed. NFA granted declaration of lawful management rights over 145.01 hectares of forest reserve and order for rectification of plaintiff's certificate of title to remove the overlapping portion.

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 the plaintiff's predecessor in title unlawfully acquired land within Budongo Central Forest Reserve, as the Uganda Land Commission had no power to lease gazetted forest reserve land under the Public Lands Act 1969 s.48 and Forests Act s.13(2). The plaintiff's certificate of title, lacking block and plot numbers and issued without proper inspection, overlapped 145.01 hectares of the forest reserve. The plaintiff was the trespasser, not NFA. Plaintiff's suit dismissed; NFA granted declaration of management rights and order for rectification of title.

Outcome

Plaintiff's claim for trespass and eviction dismissed. NFA granted declaration of lawful management rights over 145.01 hectares of forest reserve and order for rectification of plaintiff's certificate of title to remove the overlapping portion.

Facts

In 1996, M/s Bahesco Company Limited acquired land measuring 407.8 hectares from Hajji Abdunoor Kayiga, who had obtained registration in 1981. Bahesco claimed NFA trespassed on approximately 160 hectares of its land in 2003 by extending forest reserve boundaries. NFA counterclaimed that Bahesco's title was fraudulently obtained as the land comprised part of Budongo Central Forest Reserve, gazetted in 1932 and expanded under statutory instruments in 1968 and 1998. Evidence showed that during Kayiga's acquisition process in 1978, a land inspection report revealed approximately 410 acres of his developments were within the forest reserve. The certificate of title issued to Kayiga lacked block and plot numbers. Survey reports from both parties showed overlapping boundaries, with NFA's report indicating 145.01 hectares of Bahesco's titled land fell within the gazetted forest reserve.

Issues

  1. Whether the 1st defendant (NFA) trespassed on the plaintiff's land.
  2. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • Civil Suit No. 16 of 2009 dismissed with costs to the defendant (NFA).
  • Declaration that NFA is the lawful entity with mandate to manage and control the suit portion measuring 145.01 hectares which are part of Budongo Central Forest Reserve.
  • Order under Land Act s.91(4)(a) requiring Commissioner Land Registration to correct M/s Bahesco Ltd's certificate of title by carving off 145.01 hectares in favour of Budongo Central Forest Reserve.
  • Permanent injunction restraining defendants from leasing out or claiming that portion of Budongo Central Forest Reserve and from any encroachment therefrom.
  • General damages of UGX 3,000,000 awarded to NFA.
  • Costs of Civil Suit No. 16 of 2011 awarded to NFA against both Uganda Land Commission and M/s Bahesco Company Limited.

Rules and key headnotes

Land & Property — Forest Reserves — Power to Lease — Gazetted Forest Land
The Uganda Land Commission has no power to lease land that forms part of a gazetted forest reserve, as section 48 of the Public Lands Act 1969 provides that the Act does not affect the operation of laws relating to forests, and section 13(2) of the Forests Act prohibits clearing, use or occupation of any land in a forest reserve except as permitted by the rules.
Land & Property — Certificate of Title — Fraudulent Acquisition — Lack of Block and Plot Numbers
A certificate of title lacking both block and plot numbers is suspect and constitutes evidence of fraudulent issuance, as titled lands without such identifiers cannot be easily located physically on the ground.
Land & Property — Title Registration — Inspection Report — Requirement Before Issuance
Where a defendant pleads lack of an inspection report as evidence of fraud in the acquisition of a certificate of title, the burden is on the plaintiff to show by evidence that the land was duly inspected by the relevant authority and an inspection report was issued before processing and issuance of the certificate of title.
Land & Property — Overlapping Titles — Priority — Later Title as Intruding Title
Where there are overlaps in titling, the latter title is considered the intruding one and the holder of such title becomes the trespasser.
Tort Law — Trespass to Land — Definition — Unauthorized Entry
Trespass to land occurs where a person makes an unauthorized entry upon land and thereby interferes, or portends to interfere, with another person's lawful possession of that land.
Land & Property — Rectification of Register — Land Act s.91 — Correction of Certificate of Title
Under section 91(4)(a) of the Land Act, the court may order the Commissioner Land Registration to correct a certificate of title and make amendments as empowered by section 91(2), including rectifying the acreage to carve off land wrongly included in the title.

Legislation cited (13)

Cases cited (3)

  • Nsubuga v Kavuma [1978] HCB 307
  • Muhammed Nabende and 11 Others v Islamic University of Uganda (High Court Civil Suit No. 33 of 1992)
  • Justine Lutaaya v Stirling Civil Engineering Co. Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2012)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

M_s Bahesco Company Limited v National Forestry Authority and Others (Civil Suit No. 16 of 2009) [2022] UGHCCD 147 (22 September 2022)
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.