Wakilii

Nabatanzi Jane v Byentalo Peter and Others [2026] UGHC 299

High Court · 2026 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Interlocutory application for leave to amend plaint and add party, arising from pending civil suit
Decision
Application allowed; leave granted to amend plaint and add Commissioner Land Registration as party

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 plaint to include particulars of fraud omitted due to counsel's mistake and to reflect additional facts discovered after filing. The court held that amendments should be freely allowed where necessary to determine real issues in controversy and where no prejudice results. The Commissioner Land Registration was added as a necessary party whose presence is required for effective adjudication of registration issues and to avoid multiplicity of suits.

Outcome

Application allowed; leave granted to amend plaint and add Commissioner Land Registration as party

Facts

The Applicant, as administrator of an estate, filed Civil Suit No. 14 of 2022 against three Respondents. The original plaint did not include particulars of fraud, which the Applicant attributed to a mistake by former counsel. After filing, additional facts came to light that materially affected the reliefs sought. The Applicant sought leave to amend the plaint to include fraud particulars and to add the Commissioner Land Registration as a party, given allegations relating to land registration. The Respondents opposed the application, alleging bad faith and delay, but filed no written submissions. No evidence had been adduced in the main suit at the time of the application.

Issues

  1. Whether the Applicant should be granted leave to amend the plaint.
  2. Whether the Commissioner Land Registration should be added as a party to the suit.

Orders

  • The Applicant is granted leave to amend the plaint in terms of the draft amended plaint attached to the application.
  • The Commissioner Land Registration is hereby added as a party to Civil Suit No. 14 of 2022.
  • The Applicant shall file and serve the amended plaint upon all the Respondents and the added party within fourteen (14) days from the date of this ruling.
  • The Respondents and the added party shall be at liberty to file and serve their respective amended written statements of defence, if any, in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules.
  • The costs of this application shall be in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Principles Governing Grant of Leave
Under Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court has discretion at any stage of proceedings to allow amendment of pleadings for purposes of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties. Amendments should be freely allowed if necessary for determining the real issues and enabling the court to dispense substantive justice.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Mistake of Counsel
A litigant should not be unduly punished for mistakes or omissions of counsel, particularly where such mistakes can be cured without occasioning prejudice to the opposing party. The interest of justice demands that disputes be resolved substantively rather than on technical lapses in pleadings.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Delay as Ground for Refusal
Delay, without more, is not a sufficient ground for refusing an amendment, especially where the amendment is sought at an early stage before evidence is adduced and is necessary for the just determination of the dispute.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Necessary and Proper Parties
Under Order 1 rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court may add any person whose presence is necessary to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit. A necessary party is one without whom no effective order can be made, while a proper party is one whose presence is necessary for complete and final determination of issues in controversy.
Land & Property — Land Registration — Commissioner Land Registration as Necessary Party
Where a suit raises allegations relating to the registration of land, the Commissioner Land Registration is a necessary and proper party as the statutory custodian of the land register. Without the Commissioner as a party, the court would be constrained in making binding and effective orders on issues directly touching on registration, including rectification or cancellation of title.

Legislation cited (4)

Cases cited (6)

  • Bitanihirwe v GN Mohana Roa (Miscellaneous Application No. 1212 of 2023)
  • Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1994)
  • Banco Arabe Espanol v Bank of Uganda (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1998)
  • Comfort Homes (U) Limited v Koku Apuuli and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 3556 of 2023)
  • Departed Asians Property Custodian Board v Jaffer Brothers Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1997)
  • Amon v Raphael Tuck & Sons Ltd [1956] 1 All ER 273

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Nabatanzi Jane v Byentalo Peter and Others 2026 UGHC 299 (18 February 2026)
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.