Wakilii

Mwanje v Sekisenyi and 4 Others (Civil Suit No. 570 of 2017)

High Court · [2023] UGHCLD 37 · 2023 Judgment for Defendants AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for trespass and vacant possession brought by ordinary plaint; defendants did not file defence or appear; matter heard ex parte
Decision
Suit dismissed; plaintiff's claims for declaration of trespass, vacant possession, and general damages refused

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 a plaintiff who by written agreement acknowledges defendants' entitlement to 60 acres of the suit land cannot then claim those defendants are trespassers making unauthorised entry. Despite defendants' default, the plaintiff failed to discharge the burden of proving trespass on balance of probabilities. Suit dismissed; no orders as to costs given defendants' non-appearance.

Outcome

Suit dismissed; plaintiff's claims for declaration of trespass, vacant possession, and general damages refused

Facts

The plaintiff, administrator of his late father's estate, held a certificate of title for Buruli Block 124, Plot 48, land at Kyamutengo, Nakasongola district. He claimed that in 2009 the five defendants forcefully trespassed on the land, building houses and farming. In 2016 he ordered them to vacate. On 10 January 2017, plaintiff and defendants entered a written agreement whereby defendants would purchase their bibanjas at UGX 1,000,000 per acre and pay surveying costs, and the plaintiff would retain 60 acres of the 120-acre parcel. Defendants allegedly failed to pay. Defendants did not file defence or appear. At locus in quo the court saw a house belonging to the 4th defendant on the land, and plaintiff showed this house. The local town council chairperson objected to the locus visit citing lack of advance notice to residents.

Issues

  1. Whether or not the defendants are trespassers on the suit land.
  2. What are the remedies available to the parties?

Orders

  • Suit dismissed.
  • No orders as to costs.

Rules and key headnotes

Trespass to Land — Burden of Proof — Acknowledgement of Defendant's Interest
A plaintiff who by written agreement acknowledges that defendants have a lawful interest in the suit land and are entitled to remain on a specified portion cannot turn around and claim that those defendants are trespassers making unauthorised entry upon the land.
Burden of Proof — Ex Parte Proceedings — Plaintiff's Burden Despite Default
The default by defendants to file a defence or enter appearance does not diminish the cardinal obligation of the plaintiff to prove his case on the balance of probabilities; the plaintiff must adduce sufficient evidence to discharge the burden of proof notwithstanding the defendants' absence.
Trespass to Land — Elements — Unauthorised Entry
To succeed in trespass to land, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant made an unauthorised entry upon the land and thereby interfered or portended to interfere with the plaintiff's lawful possession; legal possession is vested in the holder of a certificate of title.
Locus in Quo — Evidence from Non-Witnesses
It is irregular to allow persons who were not witnesses in the case and had not testified in court to give evidence at the locus in quo.

Legislation cited (5)

Cases cited (3)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Mwanje_v_Sekisenyi_and_4_Others_(Civil_Suit_No._570_of_2017)_[2023]_UGHCLD_37_(27_January_2023)
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.