Muwonge Sulaiman and Others v Rashida Natoolo and Another [2026] UGHCFD 79
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 considered whether the defendants had sufficient grounds to caveat the plaintiffs' probate application for their late testator's estate. Appointment as executor does not automatically compel a grant, but the defendants failed to prove that the plaintiffs unlawfully sold estate land, attempted to evict the widow, misappropriated rent, or concealed or undervalued estate property. The defendants themselves dealt informally with estate property and could not rely on such dealings to sustain the caveat. Finding the plaintiffs fit to administer the estate, the court vacated the caveat, ordered probate to proceed, restrained dealings with estate property save the widow's occupation of the matrimonial home, and directed full accountability from all parties.
Outcome
Judgment entered for the plaintiffs; caveat vacated; the Court to proceed with the probate application and issue Letters of Probate to the plaintiffs if statutory requirements are met; all parties ordered to render full accounts within one month; costs to the plaintiffs.
Facts
The Late Haji Sulaiman Iga died testate on 17 December 2016, having by his Will dated 10 July 2014 appointed the plaintiffs as executors. On 7 January 2022 the plaintiffs petitioned for a grant of probate. On 2 March 2022 the defendants, a widow and another beneficiary, lodged a caveat, alleging the plaintiffs had intermeddled with the estate: selling land at Buluuli, Nakasongola without authority, attempting to evict the widow from her Kabowa matrimonial home, collecting rent without accounting, and omitting and undervaluing estate property in the petition. The plaintiffs denied being vendors of the Buluuli land, asserting they merely witnessed a sale made under family resolutions, with proceeds distributed by the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council under Sharia law; both defendants had received part of those proceeds. Evidence showed the widow remained in occupation and had received no eviction notice, that rental income had periodically been distributed among family members, and that the defendants themselves dealt with portions of the Kabowa property without a grant. The Will's validity and the plaintiffs' appointment as executors were undisputed.
Issues
- Whether the defendants had sufficient grounds for lodging and maintaining a caveat against the plaintiffs' application for a grant of Letters of Probate for the estate of the Late Haji Sulaiman Iga.
- What remedies are available to the parties.
Orders
- The caveat lodged by the defendants against the plaintiffs' application for probate in Administration Cause No. 013 of 2022 is vacated.
- The Court shall proceed to determine Administration Cause No. 013 of 2022 and, where all procedural requirements for the grant are fulfilled, issue Letters of Probate to the plaintiffs as executors named in the Will.
- The defendants, their agents or any person claiming through them are restrained from intermeddling with, selling, leasing, wasting, collecting rent from, alienating or otherwise dealing with estate property except under the authority of a grant or other lawful order of Court.
- The above restraint shall not affect the 1st defendant's lawful occupation of the matrimonial residential holding on Block 11 Plots 264 and 265 at Kabowa as surviving widow, but that right does not extend to leasing, collecting rent from, or appropriating income from the rental and commercial establishments on the land without lawful authority of Court.
- The plaintiffs and defendants shall, within one month from the date of judgment, render a full account to Court of all rent, proceeds, income or other monies received, distributed, expended or retained in relation to the estate, supported by relevant documents.
- General damages for inconvenience declined.
- Costs of the suit awarded to the plaintiffs.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (16)
- Evidence Act Cap. 8 s.101
- Evidence Act Cap. 8 s.102
- Evidence Act Cap. 8 s.103
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.22(1)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.22(3)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.22(4)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.178
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.180(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.240(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.240(3)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.249
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.251(2)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.252(1)
- Succession Act Cap. 268 s.265
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.88
- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 282 s.98
Cases cited (1)
- Godfrey Katunda v Betty Atuhaire Bwesharire (Miscellaneous Application No. 185 of 2004)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.