Registered Trustees of the Archdiocese of Tororo v Tororo Municipal Council and 2 Others (Civil Suit No. 0028 of 2022; Miscellaneous Application No. 0
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 leave to amend the plaint was granted. The proposed amendment specified the disputed plot within an amalgamated title without introducing a new cause of action. Amendment was in the interest of justice to promote clarity and avoid multiplicity of suits. Any potential injustice to the respondents could be compensated by costs. The amendment was not made in bad faith and was not prohibited by law.
Outcome
Leave to amend plaint granted; applicant to file and serve amended plaint within 7 days
Facts
The applicant brought an application under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 6 Rules 19 and 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules seeking leave to amend the plaint in Civil Suit No. 0028 of 2022. The suit concerned land comprised in Bukedi Lease Hold Register Volume 1149 Folio 2 in Tororo Municipality, an amalgamated title comprising multiple plots. The applicant sought to amend the plaint to specify that the actual plot in contention was plot M46 within that amalgamated title. The 2nd respondent opposed the application, arguing it would introduce a new cause of action and cause injustice. The 2nd respondent also raised preliminary objections regarding the affidavit in reply and service out of time, both of which were overruled by the court.
Issues
- Whether leave to amend the plaint should be granted to the applicant
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Applicant shall amend its plaint according to the proposed amended plaint.
- Applicant shall file and serve the amended plaint upon the respondents within 7 days of the ruling.
- Costs of the application shall be paid by the applicant.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (4)
Cases cited (8)
- Mannington Kato Kaaya v Tom Kigoonya Kaaya and Others (HCMA No. 181 of 2019)
- Taremvva Kamishana Tomas v Attorney General (HCMA No. 38 of 2012)
- [2021] UGCommC 178
- [2021] UGCommC 176
- Dr. Akampumuza v Absa Bank Ltd and Others (HCMA No. 999 of 2022)
- Kato Hussein and Another v Vijay Amritlal Kotccha (HCMA No. 0009 of 2022)
- Nabanja Gor ret v Nabukalu Helion (HCMA No. 250 of 2015)
- Gaso Transport Services Ltd v Martin Adala Obene (SCCA No. 4 of 1994)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.