Musisi v Grindlays Bank (U) Limited & Another (Civil Appeal 5 of 1986)
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 Court of Appeal held the mortgagee's auction sale lawful, finding the bank had power to sell under the mortgage deed and that subsequent encouragement to redeem did not invalidate the sale or raise estoppel. Fraud had not been proved. However, the Chief Justice erred in ordering removal of the caveat and registration of the second respondent without hearing the caveators, contravening sections 149 and 150 of the Registration of Titles Act and natural justice. The appeal was allowed only insofar as it related to registration: the second respondent's registration was cancelled, the appellant restored as proprietor, the caveat restored, and the matter remitted to the High Court for proceedings under section 149. The damages award of Shs. 800,000 was upheld.
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; registration of the 2nd respondent cancelled, appellant restored as proprietor, caveat restored, and matter remitted to the High Court for proceedings under section 149 of the Registration of Titles Act
Facts
The appellant was the registered proprietor of leasehold property which he mortgaged to Grindlays Bank (U) Ltd, the first respondent, to secure a loan. The loan was not repaid as stipulated, and the bank instructed lawyers and a court broker to sell the property under the mortgage powers. The property was sold by public auction to Baseka House Ltd, the second respondent. Subsequently the appellant, with funds from Cardinal Nsubuga and Father Mulebwa, repaid the loan; the lenders lodged a caveat. The bank initially declined to execute a transfer, but the second respondent obtained a court order in Civil Suit No. 705/80 compelling transfer. At the Land Registry, the second respondent was registered as proprietor and the caveat removed. The appellant sued alleging the sale was null and void for fraud. The High Court found the sale proper and fraud unproved, but awarded the appellant Shs. 800,000 damages against the bank for negligence. The appellant appealed.
Issues
- Whether the mortgagee's sale of the property by public auction was lawful and proper.
- Whether fraud on the part of the respondents in the sale of the property had been proved.
- Whether the second respondent was a bona fide purchaser for value.
- Whether the Chief Justice erred in ordering removal of the caveat and registration of the second respondent without hearing the caveators.
- Whether the award of Shs. 800,000 in damages was inadequate.
Orders
- Appeal allowed in part.
- Judgment and decree of the High Court set aside only insofar as they relate to registration of the 2nd respondent as proprietor.
- Cancellation of the 2nd respondent as registered proprietor directed and restoration of the appellant as registered proprietor.
- Restoration of the caveat lodged by the Cardinal and Father Mulebwa directed.
- Case remitted to the High Court for proceedings under section 149 of the Registration of Titles Act to enable the caveators to be heard.
- Appellant awarded half his costs in the Court of Appeal; High Court costs order unaltered.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Registration of Titles Act s.149
- Registration of Titles Act s.150
- Evidence Act s.113
- Court of Appeal Rules r.85(1)(i)
- Court of Appeal Rules r.4
- Court of Appeal Rules r.81(1)
- Court of Appeal Rules r.84
- Court of Appeal Rules r.87(1)
- Court of Appeal Rules r.89(3)
Cases cited (10)
- Robert Kitariko v Twino Kataana (Civil Appeal No. 2 of 1982)
- Kiboro V. Posts & Telecommunications Corporation (1974) E.A. 155
- Barclays Bank of Uganda Ltd V. Eddy Podridges, Civil Appeal No. 5 of 198? (UCA) unreported
- Hugo V. Wanjira (1970) E.A.
- Shanti V. Zlindocha & Others (1973) E.A. 207
- David Sebodda Colima v Rebecca Tusoke (Civil Appeal No. 12 of 1965)
- Adonia vs. Mutekanga 197? EA 429
- Maddingford v. Mutual Society (1879)
- Ratilal Gordhanbhai Patel vs. Lalji Makanji (1957)
- Ryde vs. Bushell and Another 1967 817
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.