Muluta v Katama (Civil Suit 445 of 1995)
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 plaintiff established customary tenure over land he purchased in 1969 and built rental properties thereon. The defendant, a registered proprietor, destroyed the plaintiff's structures without the mandatory six-month written notice required under the Land Reform Decree s.7 and without compensating the plaintiff. The court held the eviction and destruction unlawful. The alleged sale agreement between the parties had uncertain terms and did not constitute an enforceable contract, but the deposit paid was refundable. The plaintiff was awarded UGX 10 million in general damages for trespass and wrongful eviction, plus refund of UGX 1 million deposit.
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim for trespass and wrongful eviction proved; awarded damages and refund of deposit with interest and costs
Facts
In 1969, the plaintiff purchased customary holding of land at Kisalosalo zone Kyebando from Baturumayo Baraturwanga and built three permanent rental houses containing 22 rooms in total. The defendant, a registered proprietor of mailo land on which the plaintiff's customary holding sat, identified himself to the plaintiff in 1992 and offered to sell 2.5 acres at UGX 3.5 million per acre. The plaintiff paid a deposit of UGX 1 million in May 1992 but did not pay the balance. In 1995, the defendant, through court brokers and without proper notice, destroyed the plaintiff's structures. The defendant claimed the plaintiff was a squatter who had illegally built in 1987 and that the deposit was non-refundable. The plaintiff never received the mandatory six-month notice required under the Land Reform Decree s.7 or any compensation.
Issues
- Whether the plaintiff is a customary tenant on the land.
- Whether the destruction of the plaintiff's development on the land was lawful.
- Whether there was a breach of contract to purchase land comprised in Block 212 Plot 82 Kyadondo and if so by whom.
- Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the remedies sought and what quantum.
Orders
- Plaintiff awarded general damages of shillings 10 million.
- Refund of one million shillings deposit to the plaintiff.
- Interest at court rate on the decretal sum from the date of delivery of judgment until payment in full.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiff.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Land Reform Decree s.3
- Land Reform Decree s.5
- Land Reform Decree s.7
- Public Land Act 1969 s.24
- Constitution of Uganda Art.237(8)
Cases cited (4)
- Marko Matovu and two others vs. Mohammed Seviri and the Uganda Land Commission Court of Appeal Uganda 1979 HCB page 174
- Christopher Katongole vs. Yusufu Ssewanyana 1988-1990 HCB page 159
- Boye Steel Works Limited vs. NIC 1985 HCB p58
- Frank Rwakakindu vs. Kaboyo Rep 1993 HCB at p 165
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.