Nalweyiso v Kabogo & Anor (Miscellaneous Application No. 638 of 2016)
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 dismissed the application for release of property from attachment. While the applicant was in possession at the date of attachment, the property had since been sold and vacant possession delivered to a purchaser who was not party to the objector proceedings. The court held that the application was overtaken by events and that objector proceedings under O.22 rr.55-57 CPR do not determine ownership. The appropriate remedy is a separate suit to determine title.
Outcome
Application dismissed. Applicant may bring a separate suit to determine title to the property notwithstanding the order.
Facts
The applicant Nalweyiso Mukasa and her husband Haji Ahmed Mukasa owned property at Kajjansi, Kawooto Kitenda which was their matrimonial home. On 5 March 2008 the husband sold the property to the judgment debtor Hajji Moses Kalule without the applicant's knowledge or consent. The applicant filed suit in Nakawa Circuit Court (Civil Suit 132/2008) and on 20 October 2008 obtained a decree declaring the sale void and ordering refund of the purchase price to the judgment debtor. On 30 July 2014 the judgment creditor Abaasi Kabogo obtained default judgment against the judgment debtor Moses Kalule for UGX 52,000,000 allegedly borrowed and secured by mortgage of the same property. The judgment creditor attached the property despite the applicant being in occupation. On 4 April 2016 court bailiffs evicted the applicant and delivered vacant possession to a purchaser Abbas Kawaage Mukasa. The applicant then filed this application seeking release of her matrimonial property from attachment.
Issues
- Whether the applicant's matrimonial property could be released from attachment under O.22 rr.55, 56 and 57 CPR after vacant possession had been delivered to the purchaser.
- Whether the objector was in possession of the property at the date of attachment.
- Whether the court retained jurisdiction to release property from attachment after it had been sold and possession transferred to a third-party purchaser.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the Judgment Creditor.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (9)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.55
- Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.56
- Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.57
- Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.51
- Civil Procedure Rules O.22 r.60
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 r.2
- Civil Procedure Rules r.8
- Oaths Act
Cases cited (3)
- Uganda Mineral Waters Ltd v Amin Ivan and Kampala Minerals Ltd [1994-1995] HCB 87
- Irari & Co v Uganda Industries Ltd [1960] EA 318
- Uganda Mineral Waters Ltd v Piran & Another [1994-1995] HCB
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.