Pauline Namuddu v Natenda Monica (Miscellaneous Application 2235 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
The court struck out the respondent's affidavit in reply for being filed 31 days late without explanation, in breach of Order XII Rule 3(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules which requires replies to interlocutory applications to be filed within 15 days of service. The court granted the application for a DNA test, holding that where paternity is disputed and determines beneficial interest under the Succession Act, a DNA test serves the interests of substantive justice and does not prejudice the respondent who claims to be the deceased's daughter.
Outcome
Application granted; DNA test ordered to determine paternity and beneficial interest in estate
Facts
The applicant, administrator of the estate of the late Ssebagala Nasanairi Musisi, applied for a DNA test to establish whether the respondent is a biological daughter of the deceased. The applicant claimed that the deceased had during his lifetime stated that the respondent was not his daughter but was fathered by one Kigozi Fred with the deceased's wife Kabasweka Maria Gorret, and that the deceased had chased the respondent away. The respondent claimed she was the deceased's daughter, had grown up under his care, and had been gifted land by him in 1990 on which she constructed houses. The respondent opposed the application, arguing it was an abuse of process, an afterthought, and that the applicant's letters of administration had been recalled. The applicant had previously filed a similar application before Makindye Chief Magistrate's Court which was dismissed on grounds that only the High Court could make such orders.
Issues
- Whether the respondent's affidavit in reply filed 47 days after service should be struck out for being filed out of time.
- Whether the applicant is entitled to an order for a DNA test to establish whether the respondent is a biological daughter of the late Ssebagala Nasanairi Musisi and thus has locus standi to claim beneficial interest in the deceased's estate.
Orders
- A DNA test is to be carried out by MBN Laboratory to establish whether the applicant and respondent are biological sisters.
- In the event that the results turn negative, establish who is the biological daughter of the late Ssebagala Nasanairi Musisi.
- The costs of the tests shall be borne by the applicant and this should be done within a period of thirty days from the date hereof.
- The costs of this application will be in the cause.
- The respondent's affidavit in reply is struck out.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
Cases cited (3)
- Iran Uganda Trade & Investment Promotional Services Ltd v Uganda Investment Authority (Miscellaneous Application No. 497 of 2022)
- Dr. Lam Lagoro James v Muni University (Miscellaneous Cause No. 007 of 2016)
- Mulindwa George William v Kisuhika Joseph (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2024)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.