Uganda Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Uganda Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page: 1 court collection
Last checked: 18 Sep 2026, 04:29 UTC

Results update automatically as you type.

Judge

Topic

Legal area

Court

Uganda decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters

1 Jan 1927

Civil Procedure [1927] EACA 41

Padamsi v Asha (Cr. App. 14/1927.)

Padamsi v Asha (Cr. App. 14/1927.) [1927] EACA 41 (1 January 1927)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: Cr. App. 14/1927.
Judge: Griffin C.J. (Uganda),, Pickering ACJ, Tomlinson CJ

The Court held that, following Indian authorities, a gratuitous bailee such as Chiku, who received the ornaments for a specific and limited purpose, did not have sufficient possession under section 178 of the Indian Contract Act to make a valid pledge. The pawnbroker appellant, although acting in good faith, did not acquire valid title to the ornaments because Chiku's possession was qualified and for a specific purpose only. The discretion exercised by the Chief Justice under section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code was found to be proper and in accordance with judicial principles. The appe…

Source excerpt

Gratuitous Bailment
Valid Pledge
Possession Under Contract Act
Judicial Discretion
Fraudulent Conversion

Read case analysis

1 Jan 1927

Commercial And Corporate [1927] EACA 16

Padamsi v Fundi

Padamsi v Fundi (Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1927) [1927] EACA 16 (1 January 1927)

Court: East African Court of Appeal
Case number: Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1927
Judge: Griffin CJ, Pickering ACJ, Tomlinson CJ

The Court of Appeal held that, following Indian authorities, a gratuitous bailee such as Chiku, who received the ornaments for a specific and limited purpose, did not have possession within the meaning of section 178 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and therefore could not make a valid pledge. The Chief Justice was justified in following these authorities, and there was no evidence that the discretion under section 517 of the Criminal Procedure Code was exercised improperly. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the order for the return of the ornaments to the original owner.