Margret Kiwana v Edward Kibalama & Anor (Civil Suit No.611 of 1981)
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
Court held that defendants who occupied plaintiff's mailo land without her authority, having built houses under their father's permission as his sons rather than as independent tenants, were trespassers not customary tenants. Under Kiganda customary land tenure, a son must be formally introduced to the landowner to become an independent tenant. Defendants' separate establishment on the land without such introduction amounted to trespass. Plaintiff entitled to vacant possession without compensating defendants. Preliminary objection that suit should have been filed in lowest magistrate's court rejected; High Court has unlimited jurisdiction and filing in higher court is procedural irregularity only.
Outcome
Defendants ordered to vacate plaintiff's land within thirty days
Facts
Plaintiff Margret Kiwana, legal representative of her late husband Aristaliko Kiwana's estate, sued defendants for trespass and eviction from mailo land comprised in Kyadondo Block 254 plot 5 at Nabutiti and Kasanga villages, Gaba. Plaintiff had subdivided the land into plots 341-348, with first defendant occupying plot 345 and second defendant plot 348. Defendants built residential houses on the plots between September and December 1979. Defendants claimed they were customary tenants through their father Wilson Lule, who had been a tenant of the late Kiwana since the 1950s. The father testified he gave his sons land from his kibanja to build on but never made them independent tenants and they remained under his wings. Evidence established that under Kiganda customary tenure, a son must be formally introduced to the landowner to become an independent tenant, which had not occurred.
Issues
- Whether the defendants are trespassers on the plaintiff's land.
- Whether the defendants are bona fide customary tenants.
- Whether the plaintiff is entitled to vacant possession of the land now occupied by the defendants.
- Whether, if the defendants must be evicted, they are entitled to compensation.
Orders
- Judgment given to the plaintiff.
- Defendants shall give vacant possession of plots 345 and 348 within thirty days from 14 May 1982, that is by 15 June 1982.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (3)
Cases cited (2)
- Munyagwa Nsibirwa v Lucy Kamujanduzi (High Court Civil Suit No. 594 of 1971)
- Peter Oweka v Dominiko Achaye (High Court Civil Appeal No. 70 of 1875)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.