Onen & 3 Others v Oryema & 3 Others (Civil Suit 39 of 2010)

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.

Holding

Held that the plaintiffs' suit was incompetent on two grounds: first, they sued on behalf of other beneficiaries without obtaining the requisite leave of court under Order 1 rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules; and second, once letters of administration had been granted to the Administrator General and remained unrevoced, only the administrator had locus standi to institute proceedings to recover estate property, not the beneficiaries. Plaintiffs' suit struck out with costs to the defendants. On the counterclaim, held that the 3rd defendant held an equitable interest in 3,700 acres purchased from the 1st defendant and was entitled to have it transferred into her name.

Outcome

Plaintiffs' suit struck out for lack of locus standi and for being an incompetent representative suit without court leave; counterclaim by 3rd Defendant granted; 3rd Defendant to be transferred 3,700 acres

Facts

The plaintiffs, beneficiaries of the estate of the late Lt. Col. Wilson Erenayo Oryema, sued alleging that the 1st defendant, who had been granted letters of administration to the estate in 2006, mismanaged it by selling estate land (LRV 778, Folio 23 at Purongo) to the 2nd and 3rd defendants without the beneficiaries' consent. The 1st defendant claimed she had redeemed the suit land from a bank mortgage in 1984 using personal funds and was therefore the rightful owner. In 2010 the plaintiffs originally sued to revoke the 1st defendant's letters; the High Court revoked the grant and ordered the Administrator General be appointed, which occurred in 2017. However, in 2018–2019 the 2nd and 3rd defendants applied to set aside that judgment, arguing they had not been heard before their purported purchases were declared void. The High Court set aside the decree and ordered the plaintiffs to join the 2nd and 3rd defendants. The 3rd defendant filed a counterclaim, asserting she was a bona fide purchaser who had paid UGX 1,110,000,000 for 3,700 acres in 2013 and had conducted due diligence, including a land search that revealed no encumbrances. The plaintiffs amended the plaint to add new plaintiffs and the Administrator General as a defendant.

Issues

1. Whether the Plaintiffs have the locus standi to sue for the estate of the late Lt. Col. Erinayo Oryema.
2. Whether the suit land, having been mortgaged in 1982 by the Administrators of the estate of the late Lt. Col. Erinayo Oryema and redeemed by the 1st Defendant in 1984 using her personal funds still forms part of the estate of the late Lt. Col. Erinayo Oryema.
3. Whether the Plaintiffs have a cause of action against the Defendants.
4. Whether the 1st Defendant mismanaged the estate of the late Lt. Col. Erinayo Oryema.
5. Whether the 1st Defendant was fraudulent in dealing with the suit land.
6. Whether the 2nd and 3rd Defendants are bona fide purchasers for value of the suit land.
7. Whether the 2nd and 3rd Defendants are trespassers on the suit land.
8. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

• The Plaintiffs' suit against the Defendants struck out with costs to the Defendants.
• Declaration that at the time of purchase of 3,700 acres out of the suit land by the 3rd Defendant, the suit land did not form part of the estate of the late Lt. Col. Erinayo Oryema.
• Declaration that the 3rd Defendant is entitled to a transfer of 3,700 acres out of the suit land into her names and a quiet enjoyment thereof.
• Order directing the 4th Defendant to transfer the 3,700 acres (plot 112 block 4 and plot 113 block 4) into the name of the 3rd Defendant.
• Permanent injunction issued to restrain the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs and any persons deriving interest from them from laying further claim of right on the 3,700 acres of the suit land purchased by the 3rd Defendant from the 1st Defendant.
• The 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs to bear the costs of the counter-claim.

Rules and key headnotes

Legislation cited (22)

• Evidence Act Cap 6 s.101
• Evidence Act Cap 6 s.102
• Evidence Act Cap 6 s.103
• Limitation Act Cap 80 s.20
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 1 rule 8
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 6 rule 7
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 6 rule 29
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 7 rule 4
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 7 rule 6
• Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 7 rule 11(d)
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.27
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.28(2)
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.180
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.191
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.192
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.234
• Succession Act Cap 162 s.264
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.176
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.176(c)
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.178
• Registration of Titles Act Cap 230 s.181
• Succession Amendment Act 2022 s.27

Cases cited (25)

• Sebuliba v Co-operative Bank (1982) HCB 129
• Miller v Minister of Pensions (1947) 2 ALL ER 372
• Al Hajji Nasser Ntege Sebaggala v Attorney General (Constitutional Petition No. 1 of 1991)
• Odama Luigi and 5 Others v Registered Trustees of Arua Diocese (HCMC No. 0017 of 2017)
• Ocan Ensio Wanyama v Okeny Creaser (HCCS No. 0019 of 2018)
• Godfrey Sentongo v Kiyimba Joseph (High Court Civil Suit No. 53 of 2016)
• Interfreight Forwarders (U) Ltd v East African Development Bank (SCCA No. 33 of 1993)
• Hajat Nambi Lugwisa v Shiek Hussein Ssentongo (HCCA No. 04 of 2021)
• Najuma Ruth and 4 Others v David Segulani and 4 Others (HCCS No. 107 of 2014)
• Anecho Haruna Musa v Twalib Noah and 2 Others (High Court Civil Suit No. 0009 of 2008)
• Sarah Natolo v Nsubuga Francis and 3 Others (HCCS No. 412 of 2018)
• Prince Kalemera H. Kimera v The Kabaka of Buganda and 3 Others (HCCS No. 535 of 2017)
• Dima Enterprises Poro v Inyani Godfrey (High Court Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2016)
• Njau and Others v City Council of Nairobi [1976-1985] 1 EA 397
• Israel Kabwa v Martin Banoba Mugisa (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 52 of 1995)
• Julian Adoyo Onginga v Francis Kiberenge Abano Migori (Civil Appeal No. 119 of 2015)
• Paul Kanyima v Rugoora Per Pre Kicumbi Barista Katwerana Society [1982] HCB 33
• David Sejjaka Nalima v Rebecca Musoke (CACA No. 12 of 1985)
• Hajji Abdu Nasser Katende v Vithalidas Haridas & Co. Ltd (CACA No. 84 of 2003)
• Hannington Njuki v William Nyanzi (HCCS No. 434 of 1996)
• Ndimwibo Sande and 3 Others v Allen Peace Ampaire (CACA No. 65 of 2011)
• John Katarikawe v William Katwiremu and Another (1977) HCB 210
• Lysaght v Edwards (1876) 2 Ch D 499
• Walsh v Lonsdale (1882) 21 Ch D 9
• Justine E.M.N Lutaya v Sterling Civil Engineering Company Ltd (Civil Appeal No. 11 of 2002)

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