Wakilii

Sebuguzu and Another v Pride Microfinance Limited (Miscellaneous Application 165 of 2023)

High Court · [2023] UGHCLD 294 · 2023 Application Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for temporary injunction arising from main suit challenging mortgage enforcement
Decision
Temporary injunction granted to first applicant subject to payment condition; application by second applicant dismissed; main suit to be refiled as two separate suits

Observed later treatment

Cited — treatment unverified cited in 1 (treatment unverified) Sequitur — Uganda’s citator · Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — not an assertion that this case is good law.

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.

No adverse treatment recorded Cited 1 time with no adverse treatment recorded; not yet tested on the merits. Derived from citing cases in the Wakilii corpus — a deterministic signal, not legal advice.

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

Court found misjoinder of parties where two applicants had taken separate loans secured by different properties and ordered separate suits to be filed. Application by second applicant dismissed for lack of supporting affidavit evidence. Temporary injunction granted to first applicant conditional upon payment of 30% of forced sale value or outstanding amount within thirty days, failing which respondent may proceed with sale of mortgaged property. Court applied Mortgage Regulations 2012 regulation 13 requiring security deposit to prevent abuse of court process to delay mortgage enforcement.

Outcome

Temporary injunction granted to first applicant subject to payment condition; application by second applicant dismissed; main suit to be refiled as two separate suits

Facts

The first applicant borrowed UGX 430,000,000 from the respondent on 5 March 2021, securing the loan with property at Plot 5823 Block 273 Nakinyunguzi, Wakiso District. The second applicant borrowed UGX 450,000,000 on 2 September 2021, securing the loan with property at Plot 28-34 Coronation Avenue, Kampala, which belonged to the first applicant. Both applicants defaulted on loan repayments. The respondent issued demand notices and advertised the first applicant's property for sale by public auction in the Daily Monitor on 7 December 2022. The applicants filed the main suit challenging the debt amounts and seeking declarations of their right to redeem the mortgaged properties. They then brought this application for a temporary injunction to restrain the respondent from selling the properties pending determination of the main suit. The respondent raised preliminary objections regarding misjoinder of parties and the first applicant deposing affidavits on behalf of the second applicant.

Issues

  1. Whether there was a misjoinder of parties
  2. Whether the 1st Applicant rightly deposed the affidavits in support and rejoinder of the Application on behalf of the 2nd Applicant
  3. Whether a temporary injunction should be granted to the Applicants
  4. What other remedies are available to the Parties

Orders

  • Misjoinder of parties found in the main suit.
  • Two separate suits to be filed in respect of the loan transactions.
  • Application by the 2nd Applicant dismissed for lack of supporting affidavit evidence.
  • Temporary injunction granted to the 1st Applicant on condition that she pays 30% of the forced sale value of Plot No. 5823 Kyadondo Block 273 at Nakinyugunzi Wakiso District or the outstanding amount, whichever is higher, within thirty days.
  • Failing payment within thirty days, the Respondent shall be at liberty to dispose of the securities in accordance with prevailing laws.
  • Costs of the application to abide the outcome of the main cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Separate Loan Transactions
Where two borrowers take out separate loans under different loan agreements with different properties pledged as security, the transactions are separate even if the borrowers are related and one borrower's property secures the other's loan, and joinder of such parties in one suit constitutes misjoinder under Order 1 rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Rules.
Civil Procedure — Affidavit Evidence — Supporting Applications
An application brought by multiple applicants must be supported by affidavit evidence from each applicant or by an applicant holding proper authority to depose on behalf of another; where one applicant deposes an affidavit as a person conversant with the facts but does not purport to swear it on behalf of a co-applicant and produces no power of attorney, the co-applicant's application is not supported by evidence and must be dismissed.
Land & Property — Mortgages — Temporary Injunctions — Prima Facie Case
A mortgagor who disputes the amount owed to the mortgagee and seeks reconciliation of accounts raises a prima facie case sufficient to support an application for temporary injunction to restrain sale of mortgaged property, as the discrepancy cannot be resolved at the interlocutory stage but requires determination at trial.
Land & Property — Mortgages — Irreparable Loss — Sale of Mortgaged Property
A mortgagor cannot plead irreparable loss from the sale of mortgaged property where sale is one of the remedies expressly provided to the mortgagee under section 20(e) of the Mortgage Act 2009 upon default, as the mortgagor ought to have known at the time of pledging the property that sale was an expected outcome of default.
Banking & Finance — Mortgage Enforcement — Regulation 13 Security Deposit
Under regulation 13 of the Mortgage Regulations 2012, a court granting a temporary injunction to stop or adjourn a mortgage sale must require the mortgagor to pay a security deposit of 30% of the forced sale value of the mortgaged property or the outstanding amount, whichever is higher, to prevent abuse of court process and frivolous objections that delay the mortgagee's realisation of money due.

Legislation cited (12)

Cases cited (3)

  • E.L.T Kiyimba Kaggwa v Hajji Katende Abdu Nasser (1985) HCB 43
  • Lukwago Elias and KCCA v Attorney General and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 445 of 2013)
  • Ready Agro Suppliers Limited & 2 Others v Uganda Development Bank Limited (Miscellaneous Application No. 379 of 2005)

Cases citing this judgment (1)

How later Ugandan judgments in the Wakilii corpus have cited this case. Treatment labels come from Sequitur — Uganda’s citator — each backed by a verbatim span from the citing judgment, and are not an assertion that this case is, or is not, good law.

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Sebuguzu_and_Another_v_Pride_Microfinance_Limited_(Miscellaneous_Application_165_of_2023)_[2023]_UGHCLD_294_(15_September_2023)
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.