The Co-operative Bank Ltd (in liquidation) v Muganwa Sajjabi Michael T A Muganwa Enterprises and Anor - (HCT-00-CC-MA 716 of 2005)
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
Where objectors to execution prove they were in actual possession of attached property at the time of attachment and have an interest in it, the court must investigate the claim under O.19 r.55 CPR. The investigation focuses on possession rather than title. Where unchallenged affidavit evidence establishes the objectors' possession and interest, the property must be released from attachment. Questions of legal or equitable title are reserved for determination in a subsequent suit under O.19 r.60.
Outcome
Property released from attachment; respondent may pursue rights under O.19 r.60 if aggrieved
Facts
Muganwa Sajjabi Michael obtained credit facilities from Co-operative Bank Ltd using a power of attorney dated 18 November 1997 from Deziranta Kabanaku Sekabira, widow and administratrix of the estate of late Sekabira. Property comprised in LRV 1137 Folio 17 plot 840 Block 203 Kyadondo was offered as security. Bank of Uganda as liquidator registered a caveat on 18 April 2000. Muganwa failed to pay the debt. In February 2003, the bank obtained a court order in Civil Suit No. O.S. 5 of 2003 for sale of the mortgagor's interest. The property was advertised for sale. Eight objectors, claiming to be children of late Sekabira and in possession of the property, filed an objection application under O.19 r.55 CPR, alleging they had inherited the property from their late father and had been in possession throughout. The objectors were not party to the original proceedings.
Issues
- Whether the applicants/objectors adduced evidence to show that at the time of attachment they had some interest in the suit property.
- Whether the applicants/objectors adduced evidence to show that at the time of attachment they were in possession of the suit property.
- Whether the applicants were in possession on their own account or on account of the judgment debtor.
Orders
- Application allowed.
- Costs awarded to the applicants.
- Suit property wholly released from attachment.
- Release subject to any other course the respondent may wish to pursue as by law established.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.55
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.56
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.57
- Civil Procedure Rules O.19 r.60
- Civil Procedure Rules O.48 r.1
- Civil Procedure Rules O.48 r.3
- Registration of Titles Act s.134
Cases cited (4)
- Chotabhai M. Patel v Chotabhai M. Patel & Anor (1958 EA 743)
- Harilal & Co. v Buganda Industries ([1960] EA 318)
- Uganda Mineral Waters Ltd v Piran and Another ([1994-95] HCB 87)
- Makerere University v St. Mark Education Institute Ltd & Others (HCCS No. 378 of 1993)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.