Download

Uganda Judgment

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

AllisatiMiya & Ors v Haji Musa Hasahya & Anor (HCT-O4-FC- CS-009-2013) [2015] UGHCFD 34 (30 July 2015)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court found that the administrators, Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya, failed in their statutory duties by engaging in persistent wrangles, excluding beneficiaries, failing to file inventories, and allowing estate property to go to waste. These failures contravened section 234 of the Succession Act. Arbitration failed to resolve the disputes or produce consensus on alternative administrators. Given these peculiar circumstances and in the interest of protecting the estate and all beneficiaries, the court exercised its discretion under the Administrator General's Act to revoke the existing grant and appoint the Administrator General as the new administrator of the estate of the late Yunusu Miya. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.

Court disposition

letters of administration revoked and granted to Administrator General; each party to bear own costs

Orders

  • The letters of administration granted to Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya are revoked.
  • Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya are to cease forthwith from dealing with any estate matters of the late Yunusu Miya.
  • Letters of administration to the estate of the late Yunusu Miya are granted to the Administrator General.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

02

Material facts

Parties

Allisati Miya

Plaintiff

Assa Nahirya

Plaintiff

Namudira Zainabu

Plaintiff

Ziyada Miya

Plaintiff

Were Zikula

Plaintiff

Nakoma Jaliya

Plaintiff

Farida Miya

Plaintiff

Hajji Musa Hasahya

Defendant

Ali Miya

Defendant

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Suit / Ruling on Consolidated Suits After Arbitration

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The applicants argued that the administrators failed in their duties: there were persistent wrangles, exclusion of some beneficiaries, lack of cooperation between administrators, failure to file inventory as required by law, and wastage of estate property. They sought revocation of the letters of administration and appointment of a neutral administrator.
Respondent
The respondents did not provide a satisfactory rebuttal to the allegations. There was an admission of certain facts in their written statement of defence, and the parties failed to agree on suitable administrators during arbitration.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 234(1)(d),(e) of the Succession Act

    Administrators must act in the best interests of the estate and beneficiaries, file inventories, and avoid wastage or exclusion of beneficiaries.

  2. 02

    Sections 4(5), 5, and 6 of the Administrator General's Act

    The court may revoke letters of administration if administrators fail in their duties or if peculiar circumstances require it.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court found that the administrators, Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya, failed in their statutory duties by engaging in persistent wrangles, excluding beneficiaries, failing to file inventories, and allowing estate property to go to waste. These failures contravened section 234 of the Succession Act. Arbitration failed to resolve the disputes or produce consensus on alternative administrators. Given these peculiar circumstances and in the interest of protecting the estate and all beneficiaries, the court exercised its discretion under the Administrator General's Act to revoke the existing grant and appoint the Administrator General as the new administrator of the estate of the late Yunusu Miya. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.

Obiter and limits

  • The peculiar circumstances of the case, as recorded in the arbitration reports, justify the intervention of the Administrator General.
  • The parties' inability to agree on suitable administrators necessitated court intervention to protect the interests of all beneficiaries.

Court disposition

letters of administration revoked and granted to Administrator General; each party to bear own costs

  • The letters of administration granted to Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya are revoked.
  • Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya are to cease forthwith from dealing with any estate matters of the late Yunusu Miya.
  • Letters of administration to the estate of the late Yunusu Miya are granted to the Administrator General.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.

Source and reliance status

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Source document

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

HC: Family Division (Uganda)

Judgment

[2015] UGHCFD 34

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA

HOLDEN AT MBALE

HCT-O4-FC- CS-009-2013

(ARISING FROM ADMIN CAUSE NO. 10- 2011)

1. ALLISATI MIYA 2. ASSA NAHIRYA 3. NAMUDIRA ZAINABU 4. ZIYADA MIYA ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFFS 5. WERE ZIKULA 6. NAKOMA JALIYA 7. FARIDA MIYA

VERSUS

1. HAJJI MUSA HASAHYA 2. ALI MIYA :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: DEFENDANTS

BEFORE: HON. MR. JUSTICE HENRY I. KAWESA

RULING

This matter originally was filed between the parties Hajat Hanifa Miya vrs Musa Hasahya and another (Case HCT-04-FC-007 -2012;) and Alisati Miya, Assa Nahirya, Namudira Zainabu, Zinda Miya, Were Zikula, Wakoma Jaliya, Jarida Miya vrs Haji Musa Hasahya and Ali Aliya (Civil Suit 009-2013) arising from High Court Administration Cause No. 10- 2011)

The plaint in Civil Suit No.099/2013 was for revocation of letters of administration granted under Administration-Cause No.10 of 2011 to the Estate of late Yunusu Miya.

Meanwhile Family Cause No. 007 of 2012 was brought for citation to bring letters of administration. An order recalling the letters was issued on the 12th July 2013. A judgment in admission of 2nd defendants’ paragraphs’ 3, 9 and 10 of the Written Statement of Defence was entered in judgement. The matters were then sent for arbitration and now this ruling hereby follows the outcomes of the arbitration done so far. This court hereby consolidates both these suits using its inherent power under section 98 of the CPA, and Order 11R (1) (a) and (b) CPR. The directions given in this ruling will therefore be in reference to both suits in consolidation.

Both suits seek Orders for revocation of the letters of administration granted to Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya under administration cause, 10 of 2011 to the estate of the late Haji Yunusu Miya.

1. This Court having noted the issues raised in the pleadings, the arbitration reports, and testimonies of the different parties, it is clear that the letters of administration that were issued were not used by the administrators to serve the best interest of the estate and the beneficiaries as: 1. There are wrangles.

2. Some beneficiaries are left out.

3. The two administrators do not agree with each other.

4. There is no inventory filed in the court after 6 months as required by the law.

5. Some of the property is gone to waste as a result of the wrangles.

The administrators have failed in their duties in accordance with section 234 (1), (d), (e) of the Succession Act. This grant is accordingly revoked. Both Musa Hasahya and Ali Miya should cease forthwith from dealing with any estates matters of the late Yunusu Miya.

1. In view of the revocation above, this court hereby invokes the provisions of section 4(5), ( a) of the Administrator General’s Act providing that;

*“When the peculiar circumstances of the case appear to the court so to require, for reasons recorded in its proceedings, the court may if it thinks fit of its own motion or otherwise, after having heard the Administrator General grant letters of administration to the Administrator General.”...*

Sec 6(2) of the Administrator General Act states *“Upon application, the High Court may grant letters of administration to the Administration general”.*

Counsel Nabende on behalf of Hajat Hanifa Miya applied to this court, to have the grant sealed in favour of the Administrator General.

I do agree with his prayer for the following reasons:

1. The parties have failed to agree on the any possible administrators who will serve the interest of all beneficiaries.

2. Peculiar circumstances as recorded in the various arbitration reports warrant so.

For the reasons above, it is hereby ordered in accordance with sections 4, 5, and 6, of the Administrator General’s Act, that the letters of administration to the estate of the late Yunusu Miya deceased of Budira, Kachonga sub- county Butaleja district, be and are hereby granted to the Administrator General.

Each party to bear their own costs of this cause. I so Order.

Henry I Kawesa

JUDGE

30.07.2015

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Succession Act, Section 234(1)(d),(e)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Administrator General's Act, Sections 4, 5, 6

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this JurisAssist collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.