Share
Nakimera v Mpanga Tea Growers Factory Company Limited (Civil Suit No. 5 of 2020) [2023] UGHCCD 38 (27 February 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCCD 38
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Wagona, J
- Case number
- Civil Suit No. 5 of 2020
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Civil Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Wagona, J
- Case number
- Civil Suit No. 5 of 2020
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court found that the plaintiff failed to serve the summons upon the defendant within the statutory period of 21 days as required by Order 5 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Furthermore, the plaintiff did not apply for an extension of time to serve the summons within the additional 15 days permitted by the rules. The absence of an affidavit of service and any application for extension meant that the mandatory requirements for service were not met. Consequently, under Order 5 rule 1(3), the suit stands dismissed without notice for non-service of summons. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit accordingly, with no orders as to costs.
Court disposition
suit dismissed for non-service of summons
Orders
- Civil Suit No. 005 of 2020 is dismissed under Order 5 rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-service of court summons.
- No orders as to costs.
02
Material facts
Parties
Zephania Nakimera
PlaintiffMpanga Tea Growers Factory Co. Ltd
Defendant03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Suit / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the summons to file a defense were served upon the defendant within the prescribed time period.
- 02
Whether the plaintiff applied for extension of time to serve the summons as required by law.
- 03
Whether the suit should be dismissed for non-service of summons and lack of application for extension.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The plaintiff did not take any further steps after filing the suit and there is no evidence of service of summons or application for extension of time on record.
- Respondent
- The defendant did not file any response or appear, as there is no proof of service of summons upon them.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Order 5 rule 1(2) Civil Procedure Rules
Summons must be served within 21 days from the date of issue and return of service must be filed in court.
- 02
Order 5 rule 1(3) Civil Procedure Rules
If service is not effected within 21 days and no application for extension is made within 15 days, the suit shall be dismissed without notice.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court found that the plaintiff failed to serve the summons upon the defendant within the statutory period of 21 days as required by Order 5 rule 1(2) of the Civil Procedure Rules. Furthermore, the plaintiff did not apply for an extension of time to serve the summons within the additional 15 days permitted by the rules. The absence of an affidavit of service and any application for extension meant that the mandatory requirements for service were not met. Consequently, under Order 5 rule 1(3), the suit stands dismissed without notice for non-service of summons. The court exercised its discretion to dismiss the suit accordingly, with no orders as to costs.
Court disposition
suit dismissed for non-service of summons
- Civil Suit No. 005 of 2020 is dismissed under Order 5 rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules for non-service of court summons.
- No orders as to costs.
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 AT FORT PORTAL
CIVIL SUIT NO. 005OF 2020
ZEPHANIA NAKIMERA ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: PLAINTIFF
5 VERSUS
MPANGA TEA GROWERS FACTORY CO. LTD ::::::::::: DEFENDANT
BEFORE HON. JUSTICE VINCENT WAGONA
RULING
The plaintiff filed this suit on 14th 10 January 2020 against the defendant and the summons to file a defense were issued by court on 19th March 2020. Since then no taken was done by the plaintiff on the file. There is no proof on record of service of the summons upon the defendant.
Decision:
15 Order 5 rule 1 provides thus:
*(1) When a suit has been duly instituted a summons may be issued to the defendant—*
*(a) ordering him or her to file a defence within a time to be specified in the summons; or*
20 *(b) ordering him or her to appear and answer the claim on a day to be specified in the summons.*
*(2) Service of summons issued under subrule (1) of this rule shall be effected within twenty-one days from the date of issue; except that the time may be extended on application to the court, made within fifteen days after the expiration of the twenty-one days, showing sufficient reasons for the extension.*
- *(3) Where summons have been issued under this rule, and—* - *(a) service has not been effected within twenty-one days from the date of issue; and* - *(b) there is no application for an extension of time under subrule (2) of this rule; or* - 10 *(c) the application for extension of time has been dismissed, the suit shall be dismissed without notice.*
It is a mandatory requirement that the summons issued by court must be served within 21 days from the date of issue and return of service must be filed in court.
15 Where service has not been done within 21 days, then the plaintiff must within 15 days seek an extension of the summons. If the same are not served within 21 days and there is no application for extension of time within which to serve, then the suit stands dismissed without notice.
In the present suit the summons were issued on 19th March 2020 and thus were to be served within 21 days which lapsed on 10 20 th April 2020.
There is no proof of service of the summons upon the defendant which must be by an affidavit of service and no application was made by the plaintiff for extension of time within which to serve.
In the premises, I dismiss Civil Suit No. 005 of 2020 under *Order 5 rule 3* of the Civil Procedure Rules for none service of the court summons with no orders as to costs.
I so order.
Vincent Wagona
High Court Judge
FORT-PORTAL
27.02.2023
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.