Nampiima v Kezironi (Civil Suit 290 of 1981)
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 upheld a preliminary objection and struck out the plaint for disclosing no cause of action. The plaintiff claimed to be a beneficial owner of land based on an unregistered transfer and consent form. The court held that under the Registration of Titles Act s.51, no instrument passes an estate or interest in land until registered. The plaintiff had no legal right in the land as against the defendant, who was the registered proprietor. Mere signing of transfer and consent forms without registration confers no enforceable interest.
Outcome
Plaint struck out for disclosing no cause of action
Facts
The plaintiff claimed land as beneficial owner based on a transfer form dated 9 January 1979 executed by her father as donor and herself as donee, and a consent form from the same date approving the transfer. She alleged her father had donated the land to her in 1977, but that transfer was delayed because the land was subject to an equitable mortgage in favour of Uganda Commercial Bank. She alleged she delegated authority to the defendant to find a purchaser and surrendered the certificate to him, but that he fraudulently had himself registered as proprietor on 31 March 1980. The transfer to the plaintiff was never registered. The defendant had become the registered proprietor before the plaintiff instituted suit.
Issues
- Whether the plaint discloses a cause of action
- Whether the plaintiff had a legal right in the suit land as an unregistered transferee
- Whether an unregistered transfer gives the transferee standing to sue a subsequent registered proprietor
Orders
- Preliminary objection upheld.
- Plaint rejected and struck out.
- Costs awarded to the defendant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Registration of Titles Act s.51
- Registration of Titles Act s.91(2)
- Registration of Titles Act s.94
- Public Lands Act s.22(5)(c)(1)
- Land Reform Decree 1975 s.10
Cases cited (4)
- Cullen Vs. Thompson /1897/ 5 V. L.R.
- Clerk Vs. Soundhi /1963/ EA. 107
- Souza Figuredo Vs. Moorings Hotel /1960/ EA. 926
- Auto Garage for East Africa in Garage Vs. Moto V. (No. 3) /1971/ EA. 5^1
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.