Red Stone Training Institute Limited v Sebugwawo (Miscellaneous Application 195 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 dismissed the application for leave to appear and defend, holding that the applicant failed to raise any triable issue of fact or law warranting leave under Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The applicant had remained in occupation of the respondent's premises after expiry of the tenancy agreement without paying rent, and had acknowledged rental arrears in correspondence. The defence that the claim was based on a non-existing contract was not tenable where rent remained due for continued occupation.
Outcome
Application dismissed. Judgment entered for the respondent for UGX 64,000,000 with an eviction order. Applicant to vacate premises within seven days or face eviction.
Facts
The applicant, Red Stone Training Institute Limited, was a tenant of the respondent under a tenancy agreement for premises at Nakwero A Manyagwa, Wakiso District at UGX 8,000,000 per month from 1 May 2022 to 30 April 2023. After the tenancy expired, the applicant remained in occupation without renewing the agreement or paying rent. On 8 August 2023, the respondent terminated the tenancy and demanded vacation by 7 September 2023, noting four months' rent arrears. The applicant requested a grace period of four months but did not vacate or pay rent. By October 2023, arrears stood at six months. By the time the respondent filed Civil Suit No. 1695 of 2023 on 18 December 2023, the applicant owed eight months' rent totalling UGX 64,000,000. The applicant then filed this application seeking unconditional leave to appear and defend.
Issues
- Whether the Applicant has raised sufficient grounds to warrant the grant of leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 1695 of 2023?
- What remedies are available to the parties?
Orders
- Application for leave to appear and defend dismissed.
- Respondent/Plaintiff entitled to a decree under Order 36 Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
- Judgment entered for the Respondent/Plaintiff for UGX 64,000,000.
- Applicant/Defendant to give vacant possession of the suit premises within seven (7) days from the date of the Ruling, failing which eviction shall issue.
- Respondent/Plaintiff awarded costs of the application and the suit.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (8)
- Civil Procedure Act Cap.71 s.98
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 36 Rule 3
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 36 Rule 4
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 36 Rule 5
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rule 1
- Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 Order 52 Rule 2
- Civil Procedure Act s.27(2)
- Landlord and Tenant Act 2022 s.44
Cases cited (11)
- Maluku Interglobal Trade Agency Ltd v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
- Mako Warehouse Co. Ltd v Total Uganda Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1031 of 2021)
- MMK Engineering Ltd v Mantrust (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 128 of 2012)
- Uganda Coffee Development Authority v Stephen Banya (Civil Suit No. 140 of 2018)
- Joy Tumushabe and Another v Anglo African Ltd and Another (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 1999)
- Jamil Ssenyonjo v Jonathan Bunjo (Civil Suit No. 180 of 2012)
- Kotecha v Adam Mohammed [2002] 1 EA 112
- Twentsche Overseas Trading Co. Ltd v Bombay Garage [1958] EA 741
- Post Bank (U) Limited v Abdul Ssozi (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2015)
- Ndibazza Naima v Acacia Finance Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 1144 of 2014)
- Uganda Development Bank v Muganga Construction Co. Ltd [1981] HCB 35
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.