Wakilii

Twesiime v Ssekoyondwa and Another (Miscellaneous Application No. 2259 of 2021)

High Court · [2022] UGHCLD 118 · 2022 Application Granted AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for leave to amend pleadings arising out of Civil Suit No. 712 of 2021
Decision
Application for leave to amend pleadings granted with directions for filing amended pleadings and responses

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 granted the application for leave to amend pleadings. The court held that misnomers in party names can be corrected by amendment where done in good faith and the substance of identities is not affected. The court allowed correction of the respondents' names, permitted addition of the Commissioner for Land Registration as a necessary party, and granted leave to amend the plaint to incorporate new facts discovered after a boundary opening exercise, finding the amendments were made in good faith, intended to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, and would not prejudice the respondents.

Outcome

Application for leave to amend pleadings granted with directions for filing amended pleadings and responses

Facts

The applicant, registered proprietor of land comprised in Busiro Block 331 Plot 1871, filed Civil Suit No. 712 of 2021 against the respondents for trespass. Before a temporary injunction was issued, the parties conducted a boundary opening exercise using surveyors. The survey revealed that plots 1762 and 1163, which overlapped each other, were registered in the name of Aidan Chwa Sekatawa, while plot 1871 was registered in the name Twesiime Fredrick Tabuta. The applicant had sued parties named Emmanuel Ssekyondwa and Sekatawa Rogius, but discovered the correct names were Emmanuel Ssemombwe and Sekatawa Aidan Chwa. The survey also prompted investigations into the originality of the plots and previous owners. The applicant sought leave to correct the misnomers, add the name Tabuta to his own name, correct the 2nd respondent's name to include Aidan Chwa, add the Commissioner for Land Registration as a party, and amend the plaint to incorporate new facts discovered from the survey and investigations.

Issues

  1. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to correct misnomers in the names of the respondents.
  2. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to add the name 'Tabuta' to the applicant's name as reflected in the certificate of title.
  3. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to add the name 'Aidan Chwa' to the 2nd respondent's name and drop 'Rogius'.
  4. Whether the Commissioner for Land Registration should be added as a party to the suit.
  5. Whether the applicant should be granted leave to amend the plaint to incorporate new facts discovered after the boundary opening exercise.

Orders

  • Application granted.
  • Applicant directed to effect necessary amendments to the pleadings and serve other parties within 15 days from date of delivery of ruling.
  • Written Statement of Defence by Commissioner for Land Registration and amended Written Statements of Defence to be filed within 15 days after service.
  • Rejoinder to be filed within 5 days after receiving Written Statement of Defence.
  • Costs in the cause.

Rules and key headnotes

Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Correction of Misnomers
A misnomer in naming a party can be corrected by amendment under Order 1 rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Rules where the misnomer is done in good faith and the substance of identities of the parties is not affected.
Civil Procedure — Joinder of Parties — Addition of Necessary Party
Under Order 1 rule 10(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules, a person may be added as a party at any stage of proceedings where it is necessary to show either that the orders sought would legally affect that person's interest, that joinder is desirable to avoid multiplicity of suits, or that a defendant cannot effectually set up a defence unless that person is joined.
Civil Procedure — Amendment of Pleadings — Discovery of New Facts
Under Order 6 rule 19 of the Civil Procedure Rules, the court may allow amendment of pleadings at any stage to incorporate new material facts discovered after filing, provided the amendment is made in good faith, does not substitute a distinct cause of action, is not barred by law, and does not occasion injustice to the opposite party that cannot be compensated by costs.

Legislation cited (6)

Cases cited (7)

  • Attorney General v Sabic Building and Decorating Contractors Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 299 of 2012)
  • Attorney General v Sayja Television (Civil Suit No. 614 of 1998)
  • Departed Asians Property Custodian Board v Jaffer Brothers Ltd [1999] 1 EA 55
  • Gaso Transport Services (Bus) Ltd v Obene [1990-1994] EA 88
  • Mulowooza & Brothers Ltd v Shah & Co. Ltd (Supreme Court Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2010)
  • Ushang Limited v Airtel Uganda & American Tower Co. Ltd (Miscellaneous Application No. 1930 of 2021)
  • Okello Wibert v Obel Robert (Miscellaneous Application No. 97 of 2020)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Twesiime_v_Ssekoyondwa_and_Another_(Miscellaneous_Application_No._2259_of_2021)_[2022]_UGHCLD_118_(2_June_2022)
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.