Salongo Lukwago and 2 Others v Ssentongo and Another (Miscellaneous Appeal 482 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 High Court dismissed an appeal against the Deputy Registrar's grant of a temporary injunction. The court held that appellants who chose not to oppose an application by failing to file an affidavit in reply cannot subsequently appeal orders granted in those exact terms. Additionally, the appeal was filed 15 days after the Deputy Registrar's decision without seeking leave to file out of time, contrary to the seven-day limit in Section 79(b) of the Civil Procedure Act, rendering it improper and unable to be entertained.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs to respondents; injunctive order of Deputy Registrar upheld
Facts
The respondents obtained a temporary injunction from the Deputy Registrar restraining the appellants from occupying, selling, transferring, developing or dealing with suit property pending determination of the main suit in Civil Suit No. 1385 of 2023. The appellants were served with Miscellaneous Application No. 3660 of 2023 but filed no affidavit in reply. At a hearing on an unspecified date in late 2023, they were granted time to file a reply by 20/12/2023 and written submissions, but filed neither by the time the Deputy Registrar delivered the ruling on 14/12/2024. The Deputy Registrar granted the injunction in the exact terms sought. The appellants filed this appeal on 1/3/2024, seeking to set aside the injunction and maintain the status quo pending the main suit.
Issues
- Whether the appellants' failure to file an affidavit in reply to the application for temporary injunction before the Deputy Registrar precluded them from appealing the granted orders.
- Whether the appeal was filed within the statutory time limit prescribed by Section 79(b) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondents.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
Cases cited (3)
- Kaahwa Francis v Commissioner Land Registration (HCMA No. 2 of 2012)
- William Akankwasa v Registrar of Titles (HCMA No. 33 of 2008)
- Murangwa Bruno and Another v Luyimbazi James (Miscellaneous Appeal No. 0016 of 2019)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.