Moses Nuwa Senkyonyo and Another v Sarah Nakato and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 3968 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 35 (27 June 2025)

5 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

FAMILY DIVISION

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No. 3968 OF 2025

(ARISING OUT OF ADMINISTRATION CAUSE N0. 1420 OF 2007)

10 IN THE MATTER OF THE LATE ZEKIYA SEMPA FORMERLY RESIDENT OF KIREKU VILLAGE, BUTUNTUMULA SUB-COUNTY, LUWERO DISTRICT

AND

IN THE MATTER OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION GRANTED TO 15 MOSES NUWA SENKYONYO AND SAMSON SENTUMBWE

AND

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE AN INVENTORY OUT OF TIME.

20 1. MOSES NUWA SENKYONYO :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPLICANTS 2. SAMSON SENTUMBWE

VERSUS

- 1. SARAH NAKATO :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENTS - 2. JACKSON SEKASAMBA - 25 3. LYDIA NAKAMU MUYANJA - 4. BRIAN KINOBE - 5. MARTIN SERUNKUMA - 6. TREVOR LUMU - 7. IAN JEMBA

30 BEFORE: HON LADY JUSTICE IMMACULATE BUSINGYE BYARUHANGA

RULING

*Introduction*

This application was brought by way of Notice of Motion under Section 256(2) and

35 section 259 (2) and (3) of the Succession Act Cap 268 as amended, Section 98 of the

- 5 Civil Procedure Act Cap 282 and Order 52 rules 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules S1 71-1 seeking for orders that; - 1. Leave be granted to the applicant to file an inventory and final account out of time in respect of the Estate of the late Zekiya Sempa vide Administration Cause N0.1420 of 2007 - 10 2. The Letters of Administration granted to the Applicant vide HCT-00-FD-1420 OF 2007 be renewed for a period of two years or for a further period as court deems fit.

The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by Moses Nuwa Senkyonyo, the applicant and briefly the grounds are;

- 15 1. That the applicants obtained letters of administration for the Estate of the Late Zekiya Sempa vide Administration Cause No.1420 of 2007. - 2. That the administrators were supposed to file an inventory and final account with in a period of six months and one year respectively as its provided under the law. - 20 3. That the administrators had not yet distributed the estate amongst the beneficiaries of the estate due to unforeseen circumstances. - 4. That at the time of obtaining the grant, there were on going land wrangles on the estate property by squatters claiming to be in ownership of part of the land, a situation which contributed to the failure to file the inventory and final 25 account within the designated time. - 5. That the applicants are now ready to file the inventory and final account and therefore seek for court's leave to file the same out of time. - 6. That it is the interest of justice that this application for extension of time within which to file an inventory and extension of letters of administration is granted.

5 *Background*

Following the demise of Zekiya Sempa, the applicants petitioned court for letters of administration vide Administration Cause No. 1420 of 2007, which were granted on 3 rd March 200821 by the Hon. Lady Justice Margaret Oguli Oumo. However, contrary to the requirements of Section 273(1) of the Succession Act Cap 268 (as 10 amended), the applicants never filed an inventory within the requisite time. In addition, the said letters of Administration expired on 31st May 2025 by operation

of law before the applicants could finalize the distribution of the deceased's Estate

as administrators hence this application. *Representation*

15 In the instant application, the applicants were self-represented.

Issue for Determination

I have observed that the applicants did not framed any issues for determination. Therefore, I shall invoke the powers of this court to do the same under Order 15 rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI 71-1 which gives court powers at any time 20 before passing a decree to amend the issues or frame additional issues or frame additional issues on such terms as it thinks fit, and all such amendments or additional issues as may be necessary for determining the matters in controversy between the parties shall be so made or framed.

This court has resolved that the main issues for resolution are, whether there is

25 sufficient cause for the Letters of Administration of the Estate of the late Zekiya Sempa to be extended and whether there is sufficient cause for the inventory and final account to be filed out of time.

5 *Parties' submissions*

The applicants submitted that the deceased left behind property comprised in Bulemezi Block 771 plot 2 at Kireku measuring approximately 12.15 hectares. The applicants further averred that at the time of receipt of the grant, the applicants found several land wrangles on the estate property involving squatters who claimed to own

10 part of the property and these disputes needed to be resolved by the applicants before distributing the estate property.

The applicants submitted that now that the disputes have been resolved, the administrators are ready to file an inventory and the final account, but the same can only be done after the letters of administration have been extended or renewed since the same expired on 31 15 st May 2025 by operation of law.

*Resolution*

Whether there is sufficient cause for the Letters of Administration of the Estate of the late Zekiya Sempa to be extended

Before I proceed to resolve the issues at hand, it should be noted that this application 20 has been overtaken by events since the deceased's letters of Administration have since expired as of 31st May 2025, following the application of Section 337 (2) of the Succession Act as amended.

Whereas, the applicants applied Section 259 of the Succession Act which was amended by Section 55 (3) of the Succession Amendment Act and is now Section

25 256 of the Succession Act, Cap 268 (Revised Laws of Uganda), I have observed that the letters of Administration of the Estate of the Late Zekiya Sempa were issued on 3rd March 2008, which was before 31st May 2022, hence the applicable law being Section 337 (2) (supra).

5 Section 337(2) of this Act states that;

*"A grant of probate or letters of administration issued by a court of competent jurisdiction before the 31st day of May 2022, shall remain in force for a period of three years from the 31st day of May 2022".*

Section 337(4) of the Succession Act provides that;

10 "*The duration of a grant of probate or letters of administration referred to in subsection (2) may, on application to court by the… administrator or administratrix of an estate, be extended for a reasonable period determined by court".*

Therefore, the applicable law in the instant case is Section 337 (2) and (4) of the

- 15 Succession Act as opposed to Section 259 (currently Section 256) of the same Act. It should be noted that application of the proper law is a matter of substance over form. This notwithstanding, I am guided by the case Tolith Andrew versus Dholaga Fred High Court Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3 of 2020, where the Hon. Lady Justice Faridah Shamilah Bukirwa cited with authority the case of Saggu - 20 versus Road Motor Cycles (U) LTD [2002]1 EA 258, where it was held that;

*"As far as wrong citation of law is concerned or wrong procedure is concerned, the court restated the law the wrong procedure or wrong citation of law would not invalidate proceedings. It does not go to jurisdiction or cause prejudice to the opposite side. The general law* 25 *is that where an application does not cite any law at all or cites the wrong law but jurisdiction to grant the order sought exists then, the irregularity or omission can be ignored and the correct law instilled".*

Therefore, I shall ignore the citation of Section 256 instead of Section 337 (2) and (4) of the Succession Act Cap 268.

30 In addition, given the fact that the letters of administration have already expired, it is important to note that the instant application was filed on 31st of May 2025. Whereas, this application was cutting it close in regards the expiration of the grant,

5 the same was made just before the expiration of the same. Therefore, this application shall be considered on its merits.

According to paragraphs 4-5 of the affidavit in support of the application, the deponent deposed that the delay in filing of the inventory was occasioned as a result of the subsisting land wrangles that existed between the estate of the deceased and 10 the land squatters. The applicants contended that the said wrangles have since been resolved and the applicants as administrators are ready to fulfill their obligation

- however, the letters of administration for the deceased's estate which have lapsed by operation of law need to be extended as the same are currently inoperative*.* - In light of all these facts and evidence, I am convinced that the letters of 15 administration for the estate of the deceased have since expired and the applicants require an operative grant to be able to administer and manage the deceased's estate as well as filing the inventory and the final account. However, it should be noted that the property referred to is in Luwero under Bulemezi. Let the applicants file the application for renewal in Luwero High Court which is now operational. The - 20 Deputy Registrar of this court should forward the Administration Cause File to Luwero High Court for further management.

Whether there is sufficient cause for the inventory and final account to be filed out of time.

Applications of this nature are provided for under Section 273(1) (formerly section 25 278(1)) of the Succession Act (as amended) which provides that*:*

*"An executor or executrix or administrator or administratrix shall, within six months from the grant of probate or letters of administration, or within such further time as the court which granted the probate or letters may from time to time appoint, exhibit* 30 *in that court an inventory containing a full and true estimate of all the property in possession, and all the credits, and also all the debts*

5 *owing by any person to which the executor or executrix or administrator or administratrix; is entitled in that character; and shall in like manner within one year from the grant, or within such further time as the court may from time to time appoint, exhibit an account of the estate, showing the assets which have come to his or* 10 *her hands, and the manner in which they have been applied or disposed of."*

In the case of Hadijah Ndagire & Anor V Muhammad Kasozi & Ors HCCS No.

40 of 2014, court stated that, *the prescribed period for filing an inventory is six months. If the administrator finds herself unable to file the inventory within the*

15 *prescribed time, she/he is duty bound to apply to the court which issued the grant for extension of time, stating the reasons for her/his inability to perform the required task within the 6(six) months period. The court, if persuaded by the administrator's grounds for extension of time, may grant the application.* The case of Molly

Kyalikunda Turinawe & others vs Engineer Ephraim Turinawe & Anor –

- 20 Supreme Court Civil Application No. 27 of 2010 provided for the 3 questions to be determined before disposing of an application for extension of time like this one. The said questions are; - *1. Whether the Applicant has established sufficient reasons for the court to extend time* - 25 *2. Whether the Applicant is guilty of dilatory conduct* - *3. Whether any injustice will be caused if the application is not granted.*

Similarly, in the case of Mugo and ors vs Wanjiru & another [1970] EA 481 at page 484 it was stated that; "*each application must be decided in the particular*

30 *circumstances of each case but as a general rule, the applicant must satisfactorily explain the reason for delay and should also satisfy court as to whether or not there will be a denial of justice by the refusal or granting of the application" (emphasis on the underlined)*

5 In the case of The Registered Trustees of the Archdiocese of Dar es Salam versus the Chairman Bunju Village Government & Ors which quoted Gideon Mosa Onchwati versus Kenya Oil Co. Ltd & Anor [2017] KLR where it was stated,

*"it is difficult to attempt to define the meaning of the words sufficient cause. It is generally accepted however, that the words should receive* 10 *a liberal construction in order to advance substantial justice, when no negligence or inaction or want of bonafides is imputed to the appellant."*

I agree with the definition of sufficient cause presented in the authorities above. Courts have the discretion to determine what amounts to sufficient cause and in the

15 cases of estate property, the Applicant must show that the reason for the delay in filing an inventory was beyond his or her control and it was not because of negligence or unreasonable delay.

I have examined the reasons furnished by the applicants, since I have ordered that the application for extension should be filed in Luwero High Court, the application

20 to file file the inventory out of time should equally be filed in Luwero.

In the final result I hereby order as follows;

- 1. The applications for extension of letters of administration in Administration Cause Number 1420 of 2007 should be filed in Luwero High Court. - 2. The Deputy Registrar of this court is directed to forward the file containing 25 Administration Cause No. 1420fo 2007 to Luwero High Court. - 3. Nor order as to costs.

I so order,

5 Immaculate Busingye Byaruhanga

JUDGE

Ruling delivered on this 27 th day of June 2025 via ECCMIS

10