Share
Namutete v Ndiwalana (Misc Cause No. 10 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 43 (27 February 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCLD 43
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Misc Cause No. 10 of 2023
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Panel
- Nkonge, J
- Case number
- Misc Cause No. 10 of 2023
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court determined that the application for removal of the caveat and for contempt sanctions is closely linked to the pending appeal (Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022). Therefore, the court deferred consideration of the application and all related arguments until after reviewing the submissions in respect of the appeal. The court held that any decision on the caveat, contempt, and damages would be premature before the appeal is resolved, and that costs would also await the outcome of the appeal.
Court disposition
Consideration of the application is deferred pending determination of Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022.
Orders
- Consideration of the application and all arguments is deferred until after the court reviews submissions in respect of the pending appeal.
- Costs shall await the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022.
02
Material facts
Parties
Namutete Henry Mugwanya
ApplicantNdiwalana George William
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Exemplary Damages Sought: UGX 10,000,000
- Sanctions Sought: UGX 20,000,000
03
Procedural history
Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the caveat lodged by the respondent on the applicant's land should lapse.
- 02
Whether the respondent should be found in contempt of court orders.
- 03
Whether exemplary damages and sanctions should be imposed on the respondent for contemptuous conduct.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The applicant argued that the caveat lodged by the respondent on Busiro Block 542 plots 24 & 25 is unjustified and should be removed. He further contended that the respondent's actions amount to contempt of court orders and requested exemplary damages and sanctions for the respondent's conduct.
- Respondent
- The respondent opposed the application, maintaining that the caveat was properly lodged and that there was no contempt of court. He relied on the existence of a pending appeal (Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022) and argued that the application should await the outcome of the appeal.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 140(1) Registration of Titles Act cap. 230
Court may order removal of a caveat if the caveator fails to show sufficient cause.
- 02
Section 98 Civil Procedure Act cap. 71
Court has inherent power to prevent abuse of its process and to enforce its orders.
- 03
Section 33 Judicature Act cap. 13
Court may award exemplary damages for contemptuous conduct.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court determined that the application for removal of the caveat and for contempt sanctions is closely linked to the pending appeal (Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022). Therefore, the court deferred consideration of the application and all related arguments until after reviewing the submissions in respect of the appeal. The court held that any decision on the caveat, contempt, and damages would be premature before the appeal is resolved, and that costs would also await the outcome of the appeal.
Obiter and limits
- The court noted the importance of not prejudicing the pending appeal by making determinations on related interlocutory applications.
- The competence of the appeal and related objections will be considered after perusal of parties' submissions.
Court disposition
Consideration of the application is deferred pending determination of Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022.
- Consideration of the application and all arguments is deferred until after the court reviews submissions in respect of the pending appeal.
- Costs shall await the outcome of Civil Appeal No. 72 of 2022.
Source and reliance status
HC: Land 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: Land Division (Uganda)
Judgment
THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
(LAND DIVISION)
MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO.10 OF 2023
NAMUTETE HENRY MUGWANYA::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: $\mathsf{S}$
VERSUS
NDIWALANA GEORGE WILLIAM::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Before: Lady Justice Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya.
Ruling.
The applicant, Mr. Namutete Henry Mugwanya brought this application under Section 33 of the Judicature Act cap. 13, Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act cap.71, Sections 140(1), 142, 145, & 180 of the Registration of Titles Act cap. 230, and Order 52 rules 1, 2, & 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules SI $71-1$ seeking orders that;
- a. The respondent shows cause why the caveat lodged on the applicant's land comprised in Busiro Block 542 plots 24 & 25 should not lapse; - 20 b. The caveat lodged by the respondent be removed; - c. The respondent be found in contempt of court orders;
d. The respondent be ordered to pay exemplary damages of $shs.10,000,000/=;$
$\mathbf{1}$
$\cdot$
Mulae for J
e. The respondent be fined shs. 20,000,000 (twenty millions) as sanctions for his contemptuous conduct;
$f$ . Costs of the application be provided for.
Decision of court: $\mathsf{S}$
$\bullet$
The possibility has been considered by this court that orders sought in this application may or may not have impact on the pending appeal: *Civil Appeal* No. 72 of 2022 which was filed before this application and in respect of which appeal directives have now been issued.
- Accordingly, the consideration of this application and all arguments as raised 10 for or in objection to that appeal, including the competence of that appeal as raised by counsel for the applicant in MA No. 1777/2022, is pending and shall be made after perusal by court of the submissions made by both parties in respect of the pending appeal. - Costs shall await the outcome of the decision in *Civil Appeal No.* 72 of 2022. 15
Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya
Judge
28<sup>th</sup> February, 2023<br>27/2/2023 alab
Delivered via enail<br>Aberge J<br>27/2/2023
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.