Onyaiti and 3 Others v Mwesigwa Byakutaga and Another (Misc Cause 13 of 2024)
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 the High Court has inherent jurisdiction under s.98 of the Civil Procedure Act and s.33 of the Judicature Act to order rectification of a certificate of title where a survey report establishes that the registered plot position on the cadastral map does not match the ground position due to displacement, and where portions of land occupied by customary owners have been erroneously included in the certificate. Application granted with orders for surrender and rectification.
Outcome
Certificate of title ordered to be surrendered for rectification to exclude applicants' land, enabling applicants to register their land under the Registration of Titles Act
Facts
The applicants are customary owners of plots in Kiryatete West Cell, Hoima City, neighbouring the 1st respondent's land. When they sought to bring their plots under the Registration of Titles Act, their surveyor discovered that their plots were affected by the 1st respondent's certificate of title on the cadastral map. A complaint was lodged with the LC1 and referred to the RCC Hoima City. A meeting was held and parties agreed to open boundaries of the 1st respondent's certificate of title. Upon opening boundaries, it was discovered that the 1st respondent's original plot 397, Bugahya Block 17, position on the cadastral map does not match the land on ground due to displacement/shift in position. The surveyor recommended rectification of plot displacement so that the 1st respondent's plot sits properly on the cadastral map. The 1st respondent refused to surrender his certificate of title for rectification. The 1st respondent claimed to be the registered owner with developments on the land and alleged that the applicants' purchase agreements were forgeries.
Issues
- Whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain this application
- Whether the Applicants are entitled to an order directing the 1st Respondent to surrender his certificate of title to the 2nd Respondent for rectification
- What remedies are available to the parties
Orders
- The 1st Respondent surrenders his certificate of title for land comprised in FRV HQT 1123, Folio 13, Plot 1680, Block 17 Bugahya to the Commissioner Land Registration for purposes of rectifying the certificate of title to exclude the Applicants' land.
- The 2nd Respondent is ordered to rectify the 1st Respondent's certificate of title by excluding therefrom the Applicants' land to enable the Applicants register their land under the Registration of Titles Act.
- The Applicants are granted costs of this application.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (6)
- Civil Procedure Act s.71
- Civil Procedure Act s.98
- Judicature Act s.33
- Judicature Act s.39
- Civil Procedure Rules O.52 rr.1,2 & 3
- Registration of Titles Act
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.