Wakilii

Picho & Anor v Busingye & Anor (Civil Suit No.1236 of1999)

High Court · [2017] UGHCLD 115 · 2017 Judgment for Plaintiff AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
First instance civil suit for vacant possession, permanent injunction, and mesne profits — heard ex parte after defendants' non-appearance
Decision
Defendants ordered to be immediately evicted; vacant possession given to plaintiff; permanent injunction issued; general damages and costs awarded

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 plaintiff, as registered proprietor under the Registration of Titles Act, proved lawful ownership of the suit land acquired by succession from her late husband. The defendants, who entered the land in 1996, failed to prove bonafide occupancy and could not invoke protection under Land Act s.29(2), as they had not occupied the land for 12 years before the 1995 Constitution. The plaintiff was entitled to vacant possession, a permanent injunction, and general damages for trespass, but mesne profits were refused for lack of evidence on quantum.

Outcome

Defendants ordered to be immediately evicted; vacant possession given to plaintiff; permanent injunction issued; general damages and costs awarded

Facts

In 1969, the late Picho Ali purchased the suit property in Mutungo, Kitintale, and was registered as proprietor. The land was undeveloped at purchase. After his death, his wife Gertrude Picho Ali and his brother Dr. Albert Picho Owiny obtained letters of administration and became registered proprietors. In 1996, Leo Mbalangu (2nd defendant's father) and Helen Busingye (1st defendant) entered the land without authority and began construction. Plaintiffs warned them through lawyers and Kampala City Council, and filed a criminal trespass complaint in 1997. The property was later transferred to Fred Picho Kerali, the plaintiffs' son and customary heir. Defendants claimed bonafide occupancy, alleging they had paid busulu to the former mailo owner and were unaware of Picho Ali's purchase, but produced no evidence. The case, filed in 1999, suffered multiple adjournments and dismissals. After defendants and their counsel failed to appear on the scheduled hearing date in October 2016, the matter proceeded ex parte.

Issues

  1. Whether the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of the suit property.
  2. Whether the Defendants' possession of the suit property is lawful.
  3. What remedies are available to the parties.

Orders

  • The Defendants to be immediately evicted from the suit land and vacant possession be given to the Plaintiff.
  • A permanent Injunction is issued against the Defendants from interfering with the suit property.
  • General damages for trespass, suffering and inconvenience assessed at UGX 200,000,000 to be paid by the Defendants.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the Plaintiff.

Rules and key headnotes

Land Law — Registered Proprietorship — Certificate of Title as Conclusive Evidence of Ownership
A certificate of title under the Registration of Titles Act is conclusive evidence of ownership, and the registered proprietor is entitled to take action for trespass even if not in actual possession.
Land Law — Bonafide Occupancy — Protection under Land Act s.29(2) — 12-Year Occupation Requirement
A person who enters and occupies registered land after the coming into force of the 1995 Constitution cannot qualify as a bonafide occupant under Land Act s.29(2), as they cannot prove having been in occupation for 12 years prior to the Constitution.
Land Law — Succession — Transfer of Title to Heir under Registration of Titles Act s.134
A registered proprietor may transfer title to suit property to a customary heir during the pendency of litigation, and the heir succeeds to the property rights and standing to prosecute the claim.
Civil Procedure — Ex Parte Proceedings — Order 9 Rule 20(1)(a) CPR — Non-Appearance of Defendant
Where a defendant fails to appear on a date scheduled for hearing after multiple adjournments, the court may proceed to hear the matter ex parte and enter judgment on the evidence adduced by the plaintiff.
Evidence — Burden of Proof — Claims of Bonafide Occupancy and Payment of Busulu
Where a defendant claims bonafide occupancy and payment of busulu to a former registered owner, the defendant bears the burden of adducing evidence to prove such payment and lawful occupation; failure to produce any evidence renders the claim unproved.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (4)

  • Lutaaya v Stirling Civil Engineering Company Ltd (SCCA No. 2 of 2002)
  • Lubega Bonaventure v Lule Mathias (HCCA No. 17 of 2004)
  • Vanenso Babweyayaka & 5 Others Vs Kampala District Land Board (2001) KALA 363
  • Streams of Life Living Water Ministries v Agnes Ocheing (HCCS No. 1088 of 1998)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Picho_&_Anor_v_Busingye_&_Anor_(Civil_Suit_No.1236_of1999)_[2017]_UGHCLD_115_(16_January_2017)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.