Mubiru t/a Grand Auctioneers and Court Bailiffs v Ayeyo and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 381 of 2021)
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 granted leave to amend the written statement of defence to reflect that the respondents had collected their property from the applicant after the original pleadings were filed. The court held that the amendment was necessary to determine the real questions in controversy, did not prejudice the respondents, and would help avoid multiplicity of cases.
Outcome
Application granted with leave to amend pleadings within 14 days
Facts
The respondents instituted Civil Suit No. 498 of 2019 against the applicant and others for illegal eviction, breach of tenancy agreement, wrongful attachment and execution, and related claims. On 10 December 2019, the applicant filed a written statement of defence admitting possession of the respondents' property as listed in an inventory. On 17 December 2019, the first respondent collected some items from the applicant. On 27 November 2020, the respondents collected the remaining property and acknowledged receipt on the inventory. On 14 May 2021, the applicant filed this application seeking leave to amend his written statement of defence to include the averment that the plaintiffs had taken all their property from him on 27 November 2020. The respondent opposed the application, arguing it was brought late, in bad faith, and intended to cause delay.
Issues
- Whether the application for leave to amend pleadings is tenable in the circumstances of the case.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Applicant granted leave to amend his written statement of defence.
- Applicant to file amended written statement of defence within 14 days from the date of this ruling.
- Costs to stay in the cause.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (3)
- Talikuta v Nakendo (1979) HCB 276
- Eastern Bakery v Castellina (1958) EA 462
- Gaso Transport v Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.