Mattee and Others v Bwambale and Another (CIVIL APPEAL NO. DR. MFP 17 99)
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 allowed the appeal, holding that the respondent fraudulently obtained title to defeat the appellants' unregistered interests in land they had occupied since 1962. The court found fraud was established where the respondent applied for registration claiming the land was empty when it was under the appellants' occupation, and where no survey or inspection was conducted. The respondent's certificate of title was cancelled.
Outcome
Certificate of title cancelled, costs to appellants
Facts
The appellants claimed they had occupied land at Bunyangabu Block 84 Plot 11 since 1962 during the Rwenzururu uprising. The second respondent, Joseph Matte, registered title to the same land in 1984. The appellants attempted to register the land in their names but discovered the respondent had already obtained title. They sued for trespass, destruction of crops, and cancellation of title on grounds of fraud. Evidence established that the appellants had lived on the land and had crops and homes there. The respondent claimed he acquired empty land. The trial Chief Magistrate dismissed the suit, finding the appellants had no unregistered interest defeated by the respondent's registration. The appellants appealed.
Issues
- Whether the appellants had unregistered interests in the land prior to the respondent's registration
- Whether the respondent obtained the certificate of title by fraud
Orders
- Appeal allowed.
- Certificate of title to Bunyangabu Block 84 Plot 11 acquired by the 2nd respondent cancelled.
- 2nd respondent to pay the taxed costs of the appeal and in the court below.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (2)
Cases cited (5)
- Kazzora v Rukuba (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 13 of 1992)
- Kampala Bottlers Ltd v Damanico (U) Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 22 of 1992)
- Patel v Makanji [1957] EA 315
- Katarikawe v Katwiremu (1977) HCB 189
- Matovu and Others v Senviri and Another (1979) HCB 174
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.