Wakilii

Sam Mpuga v Ding Jianming (Miscellaneous Application No. 699 of 2025)

High Court · [2025] UGHCCD 194 · 2025 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to appear and defend arising from summary suit for rent arrears
Decision
Application dismissed; judgment entered for plaintiff for USD 15,000 rent arrears plus costs

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 a summary suit for rent arrears. The applicant admitted occupying the premises for ten months and being indebted for six months' rent but offered no explanation for non-payment. The court held that mere dispute over the quantum without supporting evidence or justification for non-performance does not constitute a triable issue. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff for USD 15,000 in rent arrears.

Outcome

Application dismissed; judgment entered for plaintiff for USD 15,000 rent arrears plus costs

Facts

The respondent landlord entered into a tenancy agreement with the applicant tenant for a furnished apartment at Taj Jubilee Residences, Kololo, at a monthly rent of USD 2,500. The applicant paid four months' rent in advance plus one month's security deposit. The applicant occupied the premises from 1 September 2024 to 10 June 2025 (ten months). The respondent claimed six months' unpaid rent totalling USD 15,000. The applicant admitted owing USD 10,000 but disputed the full amount and requested reconciliation, which the respondent rejected. The respondent disconnected water and electricity and filed a summary suit. The applicant applied for leave to appear and defend, arguing he had a triable defence.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant disclosed a bona fide triable issue of fact or law to warrant the grant of leave to appear and defend Civil Suit No. 291 of 2025.

Orders

  • Application for leave to appear and defend dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment entered against the applicant for recovery of USD 15,000 being rent arrears for six months from 01/09/2024 to 10/06/2024.
  • Costs of the suit awarded to the respondent.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Appear and Defend — Test for Triable Issue
A defendant applying for leave to appear and defend a summary suit under Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules is not bound to show a good defence on the merits but must satisfy the court that there is an issue or question in dispute which ought to be tried, and the defence must be stated with sufficient particularity to appear genuine.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Leave to Defend — Mere Denials and Vague Assertions Insufficient
Leave to appear and defend will not be granted where the defendant's affidavit contains mere denials and vague assertions unsupported by evidence of payment or justification for non-performance, and where the defendant admits the existence and terms of the agreement and occupation of the premises but offers no explanation for non-payment.
Civil Procedure — Summary Suits — Practice — Annexing Proposed Written Statement of Defence
It is good practice when applying for leave to appear and defend a summary suit to annex the intended written statement of defence to the notice of motion, as this assists the judge to determine whether to grant or refuse the application.

Legislation cited (8)

Cases cited (9)

  • Geofrey Gatete and Another v William Kyobe (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 7 of 2005)
  • Jamil Ssenyonjo v Jonathan Bunjo (Civil Suit No. 180 of 2012)
  • Makula Interglobal Trade Agency Ltd v Bank of Uganda [1985] HCB 65
  • Cwezi Properties Ltd v Tulip Consultancy Ltd (Court of Appeal Civil Appeal No. 124 of 2015)
  • Rwenzori Entertainment Association and Others v Microfinance Support Centre Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 12 of 2024)
  • International Credit Bank Ltd v Celtel (U) Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 268 of 2002)
  • Abubakar Kato Kasule v Tomson Muhwezi [1992-93] HCB 212
  • UCB v Mukoome Agencies [1982] HCB 22
  • British American Tobacco (U) Ltd v Pioneer Construction Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 452 of 2008)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Sam Mpuga v Ding Jianming (Miscellaneous Application No. 699 of 2025) [2025] UGHCCD 194 (31 October 2025)
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.