[2022] UGHCLD 59
The court found that the dismissal of Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 was inadvertent because the plaintiffs had, in fact, taken out summons for directions within the statutory period, but the summons were misdirected to the wrong chambers. The court relied on its inherent powers under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] UGHCLD 59
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Edube Abdu; Plaintiff: Abditam Fami Mohamed; Defendant: Ismail Mohamed; Defendant: Lubega Mohamed; Defendant: Christopher Mubiru
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Civil Suit No.571 of 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Suit / Application for Reinstatement After Abatement
- Outcome
- suit reinstated
- Judges
- Nkonge, J
- Legal Topics
- Abatement of Suit, Summons for Directions, Reinstatement of Suit, Court Powers Under Section 98, Procedural Irregularity
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Edube Abdu
Plaintiff
Abditam Fami Mohamed
Plaintiff
Ismail Mohamed
Defendant
Lubega Mohamed
Defendant
Christopher Mubiru
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Application for Reinstatement After Abatement
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the suit abated for failure to take out summons for directions within the statutory period.
- 2 Whether the dismissal of the suit was proper in light of subsequent evidence of compliance.
- 3 Whether the court should reinstate the suit under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the dismissal of Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 was inadvertent because the plaintiffs had, in fact, taken out summons for directions within the statutory period, but the summons were misdirected to the wrong chambers. The court relied on its inherent powers under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to set aside the dismissal order and reinstate the suit, holding that justice required correction of the procedural irregularity since the plaintiffs had complied with the substantive requirement.
Court Disposition
suit reinstated
Orders
- The order dismissing Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 is discharged.
- Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 is reinstated.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
## IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT IIAMPALA
### (LAND DTVISION}
# crvlL suIT No.571 0F 2020
#### 5 1. EDUBE ABDU
/
2. ABDITAM FAMI MOHAMED::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PLNNTIFFS
### VERSUS
1. ISMNL MOHAMED
#### 10 2. LUBEGA MOHAMED
3. CHRISTOPHER MUBIRU DEFENDANTS
## Before: Justice Alexand.ra Nkonoe Rusad.ua.
## Rullnq.
15 This matter was filed on 19s August 2020. From the record, the lst and 3'd defendants filed their respective WSDs on 1't September, 2O2O and 2"d September, 2020 respectively. There is nothing on record to show that the 3'd defendant filed his written statement of defence.
On 2"d October, 2027,lhe 2nd defendant through his lawycrs M/s Lukuago & Co. Adtocates wrote to this court notifying the Deputy Registrar that the suit had since abated since the
20 plaintiffs had not taken out summons for directions within the 28 days stipulated under O"d,er XIA (2) of the Clall Procedu"e Amendment Rules 2079; and prayed for the same to be dismissed.
The record upon perusal of the file however indicates that the plaintiffs had not taken out summons for directions since there is no evidence of the same. It is upon that basis that
25 court on 1O1h November, 2O21ruled that the suit had indeed abated and dismissed the same rlnder Order XIA (2) of the Clull Procedure Anendment Rules 2079.
The plaintiffs through their lawyers M/s Mukiibi & Kyegune Aduocates by way of letter dated 12rh November, 2O21, notified this court that thc plaintiffs had taken out the summons for directions on 141h December,2O2l, within thc statutory pcriod and requested that the
30 orders of this court dismissing the suit be sct aside and thc suit be reinstated.
This court has since established through the office of the Deputy Registrar that the plaintiffs had through their Iawyers taken out sLlmmons for directions which had been filed on 14th December, 2020 but the same had been taken to the wrong chambers.
In light of the above, I find that Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 was dismissed inadvertently since it had not been aware of that fact.
Under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 71 this Court has power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court.
In the circumstances, the order dismissing Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 is hereby discharged and the suit is accordingly reinstated.
No orders as to costs.
I so order.
Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya Judge 13<sup>th</sup> April 2022
$\mathsf{S}$
Deliverd by email<br>Amberg J.<br>13/4/2022.