Wakilii

Masembe v Commissioner Land Registration (Misc Cause 5 of 2023)

High Court · [2023] UGHCLD 400 · 2023 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for vesting order under Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act
Decision
Application dismissed and remitted to Commissioner Land Registration for determination in accordance with Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act

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 High Court dismissed an application for a vesting order brought directly to court without first applying to the Commissioner Land Registration as required by Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act. The court held that it is a procedural prerequisite that such applications must first be made to the Commissioner before resorting to court, except in unique circumstances where the Commissioner has declined jurisdiction. The matter was remitted to the Commissioner for determination within 60 days.

Outcome

Application dismissed and remitted to Commissioner Land Registration for determination in accordance with Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act

Facts

Susan Masembe, the widow and administrator of the estate of the late Godfrey Masembe, applied to court for a vesting order to transfer land comprised in Kyadondo Block 265 Plot 3690 at Bunamwaya into her name. In 2010, the late Godfrey Masembe had purchased the land from Isaac Mukasa and took immediate possession, establishing developments thereon. A sale agreement was executed. The late Godfrey Masembe died on 15 October 2021 before the certificate of title was transferred into his name. The applicant brought the application directly to the High Court under Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act without first applying to the Commissioner Land Registration. The respondent did not file an affidavit in reply and the matter stood uncontested on the merits.

Issues

  1. Whether the application is properly before this Court?
  2. Whether there are sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of a vesting order?

Orders

  • Application dismissed with no orders as to costs.
  • Applicant ordered to follow Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act and have the matter determined by the Commissioner Land Registration within 60 days from the date of service of this order.
  • If the registrar declines or fails to determine the matter and evidence of such failure is provided, the Court shall be pleased to automatically grant the said orders upon such proof.
  • No orders as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Land & Property — Vesting Orders — Procedural Prerequisites under Registration of Titles Act s.167
An application for a vesting order under Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act must first be made to the Commissioner Land Registration before resorting to the High Court, save in unique circumstances where the Commissioner has declined jurisdiction or indicated unwillingness to exercise statutory powers.
Civil Procedure — Jurisdiction — Exhaustion of Alternative Remedies
Although the High Court has unlimited jurisdiction in all matters, it is proper practice to require parties to utilize available statutory avenues before invoking the court's jurisdiction, so as not to render statutory offices redundant and to manage case backlog efficiently.
Statutory Interpretation — Registration of Titles Act — Jurisdiction of Commissioner vs High Court
Section 167 of the Registration of Titles Act makes it a procedural prerequisite that applications for vesting orders must be made to the Commissioner Land Registration before coming to court. The High Court's unlimited jurisdiction does not displace this statutory procedure absent unique circumstances.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (4)

  • Mutyaba v Kayimbye & Another (Misc Cause No. 40 of 2018)
  • Kisuule v Commissioner Land Registration (Misc Cause No. 119 of 2016)
  • Aida Najjemba v Ester Mpagi (Civil Appeal No. 27 of 2005)
  • Rashid Ndawula v Tropical Bank & Another (Misc Cause No. 332 of 2023)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Masembe_v_Commissioner_Land_Registration_(Misc_Cause_5_of_2023)_[2023]_UGHCLD_400_(30_October_2023)
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.