Wakilii

Ms Buhuka Communal Land Association v Abdul Karim (Miscellaneous Application 123 of 2023)

High Court · [2025] UGHC 92 · 2025 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of judgment and decree arising from Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022
Decision
Judgment in Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022 set aside; applicant to be joined as party for fresh adjudication

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 an affidavit in reply must be filed within 15 days of service under Order 12 rule 3(2) CPR and failure to do so without leave renders it liable to be struck out. The application was not barred by res judicata because the applicant was not a party to the previous suit and the judgment bound only the parties in personam, not in rem. Where a party with an uncontroverted interest in land was not made party to a suit determining title to that land, and material evidence concerning cancellation of title was concealed, this constitutes sufficient cause under section 82 CPA and Order 46 rule 1 CPR to review and set aside the judgment.

Outcome

Judgment in Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022 set aside; applicant to be joined as party for fresh adjudication

Facts

The applicant is a communal land association registered as proprietor of land covering five villages in Buhaguzi. The respondent, a member of the association (member No. 521), obtained a certificate of title (Block 3, FRV 469, Folio 17, Plot 37, Kiina) over part of the communal land. Following investigation by the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development and the Ministry of Energy and Mineral Development, the Commissioner Land Registration cancelled the respondent's title. The respondent then filed Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022 against the Commissioner Land Registration seeking to restore the title. The High Court granted the suit and restored the respondent's certificate of title. The applicant association was not a party to that suit and only became aware of the judgment when it saw surveyors measuring the land. The applicant contends that material evidence concerning the cancellation of the title and the existence of the communal land association's registered interest was concealed during the hearing of Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022.

Issues

  1. Whether the affidavit in reply filed 46 days after service of the application should be struck out for being filed out of time without leave of court.
  2. Whether the application for review is barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
  3. Whether there is sufficient cause or reason to review and set aside the judgment in Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022.

Orders

  • The respondent's affidavit in reply is struck out for being filed out of time.
  • The judgment in Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The applicant is to be made a party to Civil Suit No. 162 of 2022 for adjudication of the controversy surrounding the acquisition and cancellation of the respondent's certificate of title.
  • Application granted with no order as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Affidavit in Reply — Time Limits — Order 12 Rule 3(2) CPR
An affidavit in reply to an interlocutory application must be filed within 15 days from the date of service of the application under Order 12 rule 3(2) CPR. Failure to file within the prescribed time requires leave of court to file out of time. An affidavit in reply filed 46 days after service without leave of court is liable to be struck out.
Civil Procedure — Res Judicata — Judgment in Personam versus Judgment in Rem
A judgment in personam binds only the parties to the suit and those claiming under them, not the whole world. Where a party with an independent interest in land was not a party to a suit determining title to that land, the doctrine of res judicata does not bar that party from seeking review of the judgment.
Civil Procedure — Review of Judgment — Sufficient Cause — Section 82 CPA and Order 46 Rule 1 CPR
Where a party with an uncontroverted registered interest in land was not made a party to a suit determining title to that land, and material evidence concerning the cancellation of the title and the existence of the party's interest was concealed during the hearing, this constitutes 'sufficient cause or reason' under section 82 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 46 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules to review and set aside the judgment.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Necessary Parties — Land Disputes
Where a party is known or ought to be known to have an interest in the subject matter of a suit, that party ought to be included as a party to the suit so that all controversies surrounding the subject matter are conclusively adjudicated upon and to avoid multiplicity of suits.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (8)

  • Kanyabwera v Tumwebaze [2005] 2 EA 86
  • Fredrick James Jjunju v Madhivan Group Ltd & Anor (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 688 of 2015)
  • Kiwanuka Erick v Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd & 2 Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 232 of 2022)
  • Dr Lam Lagoro v Muni University (Miscellaneous Application No. 007 of 2016)
  • Stop & See (U) Ltd v Tropical Africa Bank (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 333 of 2010)
  • Ramgarhia Sikh Society & 2 Others v Ramgarhia Sikh Education Society Ltd & Others (High Court Miscellaneous Application No. 352 of 2015)
  • James Katabazi & 21 Others v Secretary General of the East Africa Community & Anor (East African Court of Justice Reference No. 1 of 2007)
  • Edison Kanyabwera v Tumwebaze (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 6 of 2004) [2005] 2 EA 86

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Ms Buhuka Communal Land Association v Abdul Karim (Miscellaneous Application 123 of 2023) [2025] UGHC 92 (17 January 2025)
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.