[2023] UGHCLD 154
The court found that the application to strike out the plaint could not be granted because the allegations of fraud raised by the respondents are serious and require evidence to be adduced at a formal trial. The issues raised by the applicant are triable and cannot be disposed of summarily at this stage. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] UGHCLD 154
- Parties
- Applicant: John Bosco Muwonge; Respondent: Fatuma Abdalla (Administrator of the Estate of the Late Rajab Salim); Respondent: Musiime R. Muzungu Adreen Julie
- Court
- HC: Land Division (Uganda)
- Jurisdiction
- Uganda
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Application 1472 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Plaint
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- Nkonge, J
- Legal Topics
- Striking Out Pleadings, Cause of Action, Statute Barred Suits, Fraud Allegations, Land Title Transfer
- 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
John Bosco Muwonge
Applicant
Fatuma Abdalla (Administrator of the Estate of the Late Rajab Salim)
Respondent
Musiime R. Muzungu Adreen Julie
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application to Strike Out Plaint
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the plaint in Civil Suit No.292 of 2021 discloses a cause of action against the applicant.
- 2 Whether the suit is statute barred.
- 3 Whether the suit is frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of court process.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to strike out the plaint could not be granted because the allegations of fraud raised by the respondents are serious and require evidence to be adduced at a formal trial. The issues raised by the applicant are triable and cannot be disposed of summarily at this stage. The applicant is at liberty to raise the same issues during the scheduling of the main suit. Accordingly, the application was declined and costs were awarded to the respondents.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- Application to strike out the plaint is declined.
- Applicant may raise the same issues during scheduling of the main suit.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
#### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
#### IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
#### (LAND DIVISIONI
## MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1472 OF 2022
# (Arlstng <sup>5</sup> lrom C|lll Sutt No.292 of 2027)
#### JOHN BOSCO MI'WONGE: :APPLICANT
#### VERSUS
# 1. FATUMA ABDALLA (Ad mlnlstrator of the Estate of the Late RAJAB SALIM)
# 10 2. MUSIIME R. MUZUNGU ADR,EEN JULIE::::::::: RDSPONDENT Before: Ladu Justlce Alexqndra Nkonqe Rugadgq.
## Rulins.
## Introductlon.
This application brought by way of chamber summons under the provisions of Section 98
- 15 of the Ctvtl Procedure Act cap.77, and Order 7 rules 77 (d), (e), & 79 of the Ctvtl Procedure Rules SI 77-7 seeks orders that Clull SUlt No.292 of 2027 be rejected or struck out for being frivolous, vexatious, failing to disclose a cause of action against the applicant, and for being statute barred. It also seeks orders that the applicant be granted costs of the application, and the main suit. - 20 The grounds upon which the application is premised are contained the affidavit in support thereof deponed by Mr. John Bosco Muwonge, the applicant herein. He stated that the plaint should be struck out because it does not disclose a cause of action against him, and that the suit is not only barred by law but also frivolous and vexatious thus the same should be rejected or dismissed. - 30 <sup>25</sup> That the applicant lawfully acquired the subject Iand from persons who represented themselves as the administrators of the estate of the late Rajab Salim vide AdministrdtTon Cause No.77 of I989 and that they handed him the genuine duplicate certificate of title as well as the transfer forms, and that he immediately took possession of the suit land without any incident and has continued to enjoy and utilize the land without any interference since 201 1.
The applicant admitted that the 1"t respondent ought not to have been party to this application. The 2"d respondent however raised issues of forgery of her signature on the transfer form. Details of their arguments are all on record.
Fraud is a grave allegation which requires evidence in a formal trial. This application raises a number of triable issues which cannot be disposed of by court before giving the 2<sup>nd</sup> respondent a hearing on the evidence that she intends to adduce against the applicant and the $1^{st}$ respondent.
$\mathsf{S}$ I therefore decline to grant this application. I will however allow the applicant to raise the issues in this application during the scheduling.
Costs to the respondents Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya
$\overline{a}$
Judge
12<sup>th</sup> June, 2023
Delivered via eail<br> $\n\begin{array}{c|cc}\n\text{Dolized} & \text{via each} \\ \text{G} & 13/06/2223\n\end{array}\n$