Share
Katungye v Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd & Ors (Miscellaneous Application No. 184 of 2013) [2013] UGHCCD 102 (5 August 2013)
- Citation
- [2013] UGHCCD 102
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ex Parte Ruling
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application No. 184 of 2013
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ex Parte Ruling
- Case number
- Miscellaneous Application No. 184 of 2013
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the applicant demonstrated a real and imminent risk of eviction and substantial loss due to the advertisement and threatened sale of his property. The applicant's affidavit and supporting documents established that the matter was urgent and warranted immediate judicial intervention. The court exercised its discretion under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and the relevant procedural rules to certify Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 as a matter of urgency, enabling it to be heard during court vacation to prevent irreparable harm to the applicant.
Court disposition
application_granted
Orders
- Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 is certified as a matter of urgency.
- Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 shall be heard during court vacation.
02
Material facts
Parties
Alex Katungye
ApplicantCentenary Rural Development Bank Ltd.
RespondentBenjo General Auctioneers & Court Bailiffs
RespondentUnknown Third Respondent
Respondent03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ex Parte Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 should be certified as a matter of urgency to be heard during court vacation.
- 02
Whether the applicant is at risk of substantial loss and irreparable damage if the application is not heard urgently.
- 03
Whether the advertisement and threatened sale of the suit property justify urgent court intervention.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant contends that the respondents have advertised his land for sale and ordered him to vacate within 14 days, as published in Bukedde newspaper. He asserts that if the application is not heard during court vacation, he will suffer substantial loss, irreparable damage, and great inconvenience. He claims the mortgage was placed on his land without his consent or authority and seeks urgent intervention to prevent eviction and loss of property.
- Respondent
- No respondent arguments were presented as the ruling was delivered ex parte.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 98 Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71
Court may exercise inherent powers to issue orders necessary for the ends of justice, including certifying matters as urgent.
- 02
Order 52 rules 1 and 2, Civil Procedure Rules; Rule 4 Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules S.I. No. 13-20
Matters involving imminent risk of substantial loss or irreparable damage may be heard during court vacation if urgency is demonstrated.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the applicant demonstrated a real and imminent risk of eviction and substantial loss due to the advertisement and threatened sale of his property. The applicant's affidavit and supporting documents established that the matter was urgent and warranted immediate judicial intervention. The court exercised its discretion under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and the relevant procedural rules to certify Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 as a matter of urgency, enabling it to be heard during court vacation to prevent irreparable harm to the applicant.
Court disposition
application_granted
- Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 is certified as a matter of urgency.
- Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 shall be heard during court vacation.
Source and reliance status
HC: Civil 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.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA – NAKAWA CENTRAL CIRCUIT
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 184 OF 2013
ALEX KATUNGYE :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPLICANT
V E R S U S
CENTENARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.
& 2 OTHERS :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENTS
EX PARTE RULING
Before: Hon. Lady Justice Elizabeth Ibanda Nahamya
This Application is brought under section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71, Order 52 rules 1 and 2, rule 4 of the Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules S. I. No. 13 – 20 for orders that Miscellaneous Application No. 370/2013 be certified as a matter of urgency. The grounds of the Application are that Misc. Application No. 370/2013 is of an urgent nature and as such should be heard by the Court during its vacation. Further that the Respondent has advertised the suit property for sale and the Applicant is in danger of being evicted from there.
The Application is supported by the Affidavit of Mr. Alex Katungye the Applicant. He deponed that if the Application is not heard during the Court Vacation, he will suffer substantial loss and irreparable damage and great inconvenience.
SUBMISSIONS
Notice of Motion filed under S. 98 of the Civil Procedure Act 052, r 1 & 2 Civil Procedure Rules 4 Judicature (Court Vacation) Rules S. 1 No. 13-20 seeking order that Misc. Application 370 be certified as an urgent matter to be heard during Court Vacation.
The grounds
The first Respondent, Centenary Rural Development Bank Ltd & the second Respondent Benjo General Auctioneers & Court Bailiffs have advertised the Applicant’s land for sale. The land is comprised in Block 225, Plot 174 situate, Kyadondo, Land at Kyaliwajala measuring 0.081 hectares. The Advert appeared in Bukedde dated 18th July 2013. It is filed and attached to the Misc. Application for Interim Order (Misc. Application No. 370). In the Advert the Applicant was ordered to vacate in 14 days. If property is not secured, Applicant stands to lose his property and house as shown in advert and already there are threats of eviction. Additionally, Applicant bought the land in 2001. The Agreement of purchase is attached as Annexture “A” to the Application for an Interim Order. The Applicant has filed Civil Suit No. 184 of 2013 in which he claims that the suit land is not a subject of attachment and states that first Respondent and third Respondent wrongfully and illegally put a mortgage on his land without his consent or authority.
I therefore pray that matter be certified as urgent to enable Applicant secure these properties.
RULING
I have heard the Applicant’s lawyer’s submissions and have perused the documents contained in the Affidavit as well as the cross references made. The Applicant states that he is in danger of being evicted from the suit property and will suffer substantial loss if this happens.
I am convinced that this is a good reason and befitting matter for the issuance of a Certificate of Urgency.
In the circumstances, it is hereby Ordered that Miscellaneous Application No. 370 of 2013 be certified as a matter of urgency and be heard during Court Vacation.
Signed:………………………………………………….
Hon. Lady Justice Elizabeth Ibanda Nahamya
J U D G E
05th August 2013
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.