Sebuliba v Instant Cash International Limited & 3 Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 2601 of 2018)
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 an objector who jointly purchased property with a judgment debtor from another judgment debtor during pending execution, and who subsequently consented to attachment of that property as security for the debt, cannot later claim an interest to defeat execution. The transfer was a clear attempt to evade payment. The sale conducted after the statutory 30-day period had elapsed was valid. Application dismissed; sale confirmed; surplus proceeds ordered paid to the objector and judgment debtor jointly after deducting bailiff costs.
Outcome
Application dismissed; sale of attached property confirmed; surplus proceeds ordered paid to objector and judgment debtor jointly after deduction of bailiff costs
Facts
Instant Cash International Ltd obtained an ex parte decree against Sebuliba Samuel and Sekamate Ian Moses in 2009 for UGX 146,800,000. After partial payments and a consent settlement releasing other property, the outstanding debt stood at UGX 85,968,500. In 2014, Sekamate sold property at Masooli to Sebuliba Samuel and his wife Harriet Sebuliba. Upon Sebuliba Samuel's arrest in execution in 2018, he consented to attachment of the Masooli property, with Harriet signing as guarantor and expressly consenting to the attachment. The property was sold for UGX 160,000,000 in November 2018. Harriet then filed objector proceedings claiming a joint ownership interest and seeking release of the property from attachment.
Issues
- Whether the suit property should be released from attachment and execution.
- Whether the purported sale of the property should be nullified or set aside.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Bailiff confirmed to have paid judgment creditor UGX 85,968,500 being the outstanding decretal sum.
- Balance of UGX 74,031,500 to be paid into court for onward transmission to the Sebulibas jointly, less reasonably incurred taxed costs of the bailiff and fees permitted by the Court Bailiffs (Amendment) Rules 1991.
- Sale of property measuring 40 decimals on Block 115 Plot 30 situate at Masooli village Nangabo sub-county, Wakiso district confirmed.
- Applicant to pay judgment creditor costs of the application assessed at UGX 3,000,000.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (5)
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 22 rule 55
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 22 rule 56
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 22 rule 57
- Insolvency Act 2011 s.257
- Court Bailiffs (Amendment) Rules 1991
Cases cited (2)
- David Muhenda & 3 Ors v Margret Kamuje (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1999)
- Mary Nakato v Nanyonga Rose (High Court Civil Appeal No. 412 of 2011)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.