[1991] UGHC 4

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f201\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f202\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f204\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f205\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f206\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f207\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f208\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f209\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 \styrsid9193239 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{ \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid9193239 Normal (Web);}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0}{\*\listtable{\list\listtemplateid1393717158\listhybrid{\listlevel\levelnfc1\levelnfcn1\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid-648881420 \'02\'00.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fbias0 \fi-720\li1080\jclisttab\tx1080\lin1080 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713\'02\'01.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;} \fi-360\li1440\jclisttab\tx1440\lin1440 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'02.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li2160\jclisttab\tx2160\lin2160 } {\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698703\'02\'03.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li2880\jclisttab\tx2880\lin2880 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0 \leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713\'02\'04.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li3600\jclisttab\tx3600\lin3600 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1 \levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'05.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li4320\jclisttab\tx4320\lin4320 }{\listlevel\levelnfc0\levelnfcn0\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext \leveltemplateid67698703\'02\'06.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5040\jclisttab\tx5040\lin5040 }{\listlevel\levelnfc4\levelnfcn4\leveljc0\leveljcn0\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698713 \'02\'07.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-360\li5760\jclisttab\tx5760\lin5760 }{\listlevel\levelnfc2\levelnfcn2\leveljc2\leveljcn2\levelfollow0\levelstartat1\levelspace0\levelindent0{\leveltext\leveltemplateid67698715\'02\'08.;}{\levelnumbers\'01;}\fi-180\li6480 \jclisttab\tx6480\lin6480 }{\listname ;}\listid1162815629}}{\*\listoverridetable{\listoverride\listid1162815629\listoverridecount0\ls1}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid856982\rsid2260152\rsid2761014\rsid3555618\rsid4218829\rsid4548333\rsid5119999\rsid5255800\rsid5466653 \rsid6300988\rsid7695161\rsid8407676\rsid8523854\rsid8809675\rsid9114219\rsid9193239\rsid9529856\rsid10845472\rsid11020963\rsid11610970\rsid12784471\rsid12854004\rsid14097459\rsid14688981\rsid14772338\rsid14895821\rsid15078405\rsid15364140}{\*\generator M icrosoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info{\title THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA }{\author DELL}{\operator DELL}{\creatim\yr2009\mo12\dy1\hr13\min18}{\revtim\yr2009\mo12\dy3\hr11\min52}{\version15}{\edmins287}{\nofpages11}{\nofwords3214}{\nofchars18323}{\nofcharsws21495} {\vern24689}}\widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1800\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot9193239\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}} {\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (} {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9193239 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \line IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT FORT PORTAL \line CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION NO. DR. MFP 1/89 \line (Original Civil Appeal No. MFP 33/88}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ) \line }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (Original Kibiito Civil Suit No. MFP 5/88) \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid2761014 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 PAULO NGUWA}{\insrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ::::::::::::::::::}{\insrsid2761014 ::::::::::::::::::::::::}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ::::::::APPLICANT/APPELLANT \par }\pard \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9193239 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 VERSUS \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9193239 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 JOBU TUGUME :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::}{\insrsid2761014 ::::::::::::::: }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ::::::RESPONDENTS \line CHRISTOPHER FRIDAY \par }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE I MUKANZA }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \par }\pard \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9193239 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 RULING \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8523854 {\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 This is an application by notic}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e }{ \insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 of motion brought under section}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 232 (3) and 4 of the Magistrate Courts Act 1970. }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 Seeking}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 for leave }{ \ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to}{\ul\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to }{\ul\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 this cour}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t the first application }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 having been refused by the learned Chief Magistrate on 1st June 1989 and the judgment sought to be appealed against was dated 8th December, }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 1988. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Before the application was heard the learned counsel }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 represe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 nting the }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 respondent ra}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ised }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 som}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 preliminary}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid8523854\charrsid2761014 objections to}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the application. He was overruled and the court proceeded to entertain the application on its merits. I now give my reasons Mr. Nyakabwa submitted that there }{\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 a}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 re certain matters which he felt should not have come in at all. \line He was objecting to the aff}{\insrsid2761014 idavit attached to the motion. }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 It was not an }{\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 affidavit to the substance.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 It was a statement}{\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 of objections or grounds of app}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eal why the learned counsel representing the applicant/appellant was attacking the judgment or }{\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 the}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ruling of the court. An affidavit should be a statement of evidence }{ \insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 basically.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 I saw or heard this. It is some kind of hearsay which is}{\b\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid2761014 admitted. }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Points of law are not necessary. He referred me to the case of }{\b\ul\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 Uganda vs. Commission of Prisons Exp Matovu Re. 1966 Ea P.514. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 He concluded that the affidavit should not be accepted since the grounds embedded in the motion was sufficient. He prayed that they follow the grounds as }{\insrsid11610970\charrsid2761014 p}{ \insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 ut in the motion. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mr. Zehulikize the learned }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 counsel}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 representing the }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 applicant}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 submitted that that was not the first time. Mr. Nyakabwa had raised the objection. The l}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 ea}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 rned Chief Magistrate made no mention to that objection in his ruling. The application was made under section 232 (3)}{\b\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (4) of the}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 MCA 1970 and the section did no}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t set up form of motion but a}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 s a matter of practice the form}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of application is by notice of motion accompanied by affidavit. He conten ded that not every notice of motion must be supported by an affidavit and perhaps that was the objection being }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 raised}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 by the learned }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 counsel}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 representing the applicant. He made the affidavit after perusing the judgment of the Chief Magistrate. It was not t rue that the affidavit was deposed to facts end evidence alone. having studied the judgment he vas convinced to the best of his knowledge and belief that }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 there was very important point o}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 f law which }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 caused miscarriage of justic}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e and that warranted consideration by this cou}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 rt. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Order 17 r. 3 }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 of the Civil Procedure Rules sta}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 tes that }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 affidavit shall be confined to}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 such facts as a deponent is }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 able of his own knowledge to pro}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 v}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 except interlocutory }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 applications}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 on which statement of his}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 belief }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 may be admitted }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 provided}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 grounds}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 there}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 of are stated \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 In some of his affidavit he swore in }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 support}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the application Mr. Zehulikize averred }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 to}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 m}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 at}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t}{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 rs }{\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 like:- \par }\pard \s15\qj \li720\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid11020963 {\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 \'93}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 That the learned Chief Magistra}{ \i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 te erred in failing to find tha}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t the }{\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 plaintiff/respondents had no lo}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 cus standi as they did not have letters of }{\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 administration in respect of the alleged estate of Ruhweza a}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 nd that the learned Chief Magistrate }{\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 never }{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 evalua }{\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 ted the evidence before him and}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 thus cau}{\i\insrsid11020963\charrsid2761014 sed a miscarriage of justice.\'94 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8523854 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 I am of the view that Mr. Zehukirize was deposing to facts which he was able of his own knowledge to prove after perusal of the records. And even if I might not be correct in so finding the }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 grounds as given in the notice o}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 f motion were sufficient in the meselves to enable this court to dispose of the }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 application. I was referred to the case o}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 f }{\ul\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 Uganda}{ \ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 v Commissioner of Prisons }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Ex}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 arte }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 Matov}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 u }{ \insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 1}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 966 }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 EA 51}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 4 th}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 learned counsel representing the respondent was of the view that }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 the affidavit sworn by Mr. Zehul}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 iki}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 z}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e should not be accepted. In the latter case the applicant and his}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 counsel swore }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 affidavit. The applicant was applying fo}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 r a wr}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 it of Habe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 a}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 s}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 corpus}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 subjiciend}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 um b}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 ecaus}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 he}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was un}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 c}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 onsti}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 tu}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ti}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 on}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ally}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 unlawfully being detained. Mato}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 vu\rquote s case is distinguis hable from the instant case. In the former case the two affidavits were riot }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 companied}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 by notice }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 of motion or a motion paper signed by the}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 counsel for t}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 he appl}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 icant setting out the relief }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 sought. And the grounds}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 entitling the applicant to such relief was said }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 to}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 be a }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 fundamental defect as to the almost}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 incurable}{\insrsid2761014 . According to }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 Sir Udo}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Udoma CJ as he then as In effect, it meant there was in f. ct and law no application capable of being entertained properly before the court. In the instant case there were the affidavit sworn to by the }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 applicant}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 and}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 his counsel and the same were accompanied by notice of motion. So M}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 ato}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 vu\rquote s ca}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 se is}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 not an authority to the instant }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 case with regards to the affidavits}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 as sworn to by the applicant and Mr. Zehukiri}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 ze. \par With those notes I now proceed}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to consider the application itself:}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 -}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\b\ul\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 \par }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 1. Whe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ther the }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 decision}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the learned Chief Magistrate involved important points of law name}{ \insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 ly. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (a) Whether parties who have no letters of }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 administrator}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 could sue and }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 recover}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 land allegedly belonging to the deceased }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 person. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (b) Whether a defecti}{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 ve plaint was an irregularity. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 2. }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 Whe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ther }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 the decision}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid12854004\charrsid2761014 of the learned Chief M agistrate}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 caused a substantia}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 l miscourage of Justice namely \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (i) that he consid}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 ered only one ground of appeal \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (ii) That he never consid}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 ered all the other grounds and \par (i}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ii) that he never evaluate}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 d all the evidence before him. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The }{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 learned}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 counsel representing the applicant while}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 submitting in support }{ \insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 of}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the first ground of the }{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 application contended that the }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 s did not have letters of Adm}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 inistration or probate and could not therefore sue and }{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 recover}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 land allegedly belonging to the deceased person in view of section 190 of the}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 Succession Act which states:- \par \'93}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Exc}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 ept herein provided no right to any part of the }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 property of a person who has died intestate shall be established in any court }{ \insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 of}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 justice unless letters of a}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 dmini}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 stration have just been granted by a }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 court of co}{\insrsid14895821\charrsid2761014 mpetent jurisdiction.\'94 \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The learned }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 counsel}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 continued}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 that the learned Chief Magistrate did not make any reference }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 to that matter in his judgment.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 It only the trial Magistrate who made a re}{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 ference to the matter that it wa}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 s governed by customary nature. }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 H}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 concluded}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 that the learned Chief }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 Magistrate}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 could have made a finding on that }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 important point of law and that had he to have done so he would have allowed the appeal.}{\b\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8523854 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 As to w}{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 hether defective plaint was an}{ \insrsid2761014 irregularity, }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mr. Zehurikize submitted tha}{\insrsid2761014 t the learned Chief Magistrate }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 only dealt with this issue wh}{\insrsid2761014 ich was ground No. 1 in the }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 memorandum of appeal and incidentally that was the only ground which the learned Chief }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 Magistrate}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 de}{\insrsid2761014 alt with in dismissing }{ \insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 the appea}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 l. The }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 defects in the plaint generally were}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 that the }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 second}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent/}{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 Plaintiff wa}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 s a minor and }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 could}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 not sue. He lacked th}{ \insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 e capacity}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to sue and }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 should}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 act }{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 have been joined as a co-plaintiff}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 . The first respondent/plaintiff who was an adult was not suing en as next fr}{\insrsid14772338\charrsid2761014 iend. Certain important points o}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 f law arise in this kind of state of affairs as in}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 dicated above. For instance the M}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 CA does not talk of the signing of the plaint by the plaintiff. In the absence of such provision the plaintiff }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 ought no}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t to}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 have}{ \b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 signed the plaint. To}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 him that was a matter which }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 warranted consideration}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 by the High Court. \par With}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 regard to the su}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 ing by the next friend the trial}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 court grade III relied on rules 7}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 of schedule 2 to the MCA l970 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to the effect that the suit should not be }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 defeated}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 on grounds }{ \insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 on}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 misjoinder of the parties. And he solv}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 ed the problem by stating that the }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 plaintiff No. 2 is allowed to sue with the next friend}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 laintiff No. 1. Unfortunately th}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 e learned Chief Magistrate in hi}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 s judgment did not make clear finding on this important point of}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 l}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 a}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 w. If he had done so he could have }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 found that rule 8 (2) of schedul}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e 3 to MCA 1970 had not been complie}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 d with because the 1st plaintiff the court allow}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ed to sue d}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 id not have necessary consent. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid7695161 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 On the third ground of the }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 application that the dec}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ision of the Chief Magistrate se}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 emed to have occassioned a miscarriage}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of justice}{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 .}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The learned counsel submitted }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 that despite the fact that th}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ere were six }{\insrsid7695161\charrsid2761014 grounds of appeal the learned Chief M}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 agistrate dealt with the first ground which referred to the complainant. The failure to consider the other five grounds of a}{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 pp}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eal caused a substantial }{ \insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 miscourage}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of justice as the a}{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 ppeal was not disposed on merit.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Having found on the first ground that the irregularities }{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 against}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the plaint were not }{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 material}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 an did not prejudice } {\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 the app}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ellant/}{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 defendant}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the learned Chief }{\insrsid14688981\charrsid2761014 Magistrate}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 should have gone ahe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ad and consider the other ground}{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 s. If he had done so he would ha}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ve allowed the a}{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 ppeal. The learned counsel submitt}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ed that general }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 statem}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ent by }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 the Chief Magistrate,}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 \'93}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 On }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 the evidence as a wh}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ole I find that the }{ \insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 respondent}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 have proved their case}{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 ,\'94 one cou}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ld not }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 assume}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 that he dealt with the rest of the grounds of }{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 appeal. All}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 th}{\insrsid12784471\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 other}{ \insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 grounds he never dealt with p}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ointed to the evaluation of }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 evidence}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 as against }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 appellant }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 court. }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 H}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 was entitle}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 d to evaluation of}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 the }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 evidence and drew his ow}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 n conclusion. Had he to have don}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 so }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 he would have found that } {\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 the disputed Kibanja belonged to the late Ibrah}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 im Ruta}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 g}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ura. He referred me to the case of }{ \ul\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 Erinest}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mbarira HCCS}{\ul\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 8O/1971.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 H}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e con}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 cluded that the failure of the l}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 ar}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ned Chief Magistrate to evaluate the evidence on record not only}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 caused a }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 substantial}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 miscarriage}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of justice but also }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 raised an important point of law. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid4548333 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mr. Nyakabwa the learned counsel representing t}{ \insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 he respondents submitted that under S}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 . 232 (3) (4) }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 provides that lea}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ve could be granted if the intended appeal involved a substantial point of law or a decision that had caused a substantial }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 miscarriage }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of justice. \line In that }{ \insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 dispute}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 between the parties whether the }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 a}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 nd belonged to the brother the a}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 pp}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ellant }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 and the father of the 2nd respon}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 dent that was the issue at the lo}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 w}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 er court. The }{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 appellant}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 walked}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 into the land on the }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 death of the father of the 2nd respond}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 ent who found the first respondent}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was looking after the former and had brewed beer which he then confiscated. There was evidence}{\insrsid2761014 that the father of the second }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent left a house}{\insrsid4548333\charrsid2761014 and land on which the second respondent}{\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 ha}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 d lived. Th}{\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 latter lived on a l}{\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 a}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 n}{\insrsid2761014 d left by his father and the }{\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 app}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ellant went and }{ \insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 confiscated}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 tl1e property because it belonged to his (the a}{\insrsid15364140\charrsid2761014 ppellants) father. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mr. Nyakabwa submitting on whethe}{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 r there were letters of Administration}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and whether a }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 defective plaint was an irregula} {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 rity referred ma to section 10 of the Magistrates courts Act 1970 which empowers the }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 Magistrates}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 to }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 exercise}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 equity where the }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 latter}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 runs concurrent with the law. The procedural point }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 should not stand in the way of }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 substantive justice. That when a man comes and starts grabbing ones land and you go to court to get letters }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 of administration which might ta}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ke long w hile one was enjoying ones land. Th}{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 e fact that neither }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the respondents had no letters of Administration}{\insrsid15078405\charrsid2761014 ,}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 that should not }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 be used to}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid5119999\charrsid2761014 defeat }{\insrsid15078405\charrsid2761014 the equitable justic}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e.}{ \insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 The land had to be lived on an}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 d was being lived on. The question of }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 succession}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was inciden}{ \insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 tal. The second respondent had to live on that land. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5466653 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 As }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 regards}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the joinder of }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 parties to the defective plaint, t}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 he common ground is that the plaint in Magistrate Grade II and III court other than before }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 legally}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 qualifie}{\insrsid2761014 d Magistrates i.e. grade I and }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Chief Magistrates are not all }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 that complicated and detailed. The Magistrate had addressed himself o the is}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 sue of the parties. }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 He}{\insrsid2761014 refused }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 to rightly too to apply the Civil Procedure R}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ules. The joinder or non joinder of the parties }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 should not defeat}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the sui}{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 t. T}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 here }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 was }{\insrsid2761014 no }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 subs}{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 tantial point of law involved he}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 re. Both the trial Magistrate and the learned Chief Magistrate addressed themselv}{ \insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 es}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid8809675\charrsid2761014 to the procedural defects and as the Chief Magistrate found they did not}{\insrsid5466653\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 affect the subs}{\insrsid5466653\charrsid2761014 tantive matter of the dispute. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 As }{\insrsid5466653\charrsid2761014 regards}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the accusation that the learned Chief Magistrate dealt with only one ground of }{\insrsid5466653\charrsid2761014 the appeal, the learned counsel}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 submitted that as Nr. Zehukirize admitted tha}{\insrsid2761014 t the rest of the grounds }{\insrsid5466653\charrsid2761014 of app}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eal were on the evaluatio} {\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 n of evidence before the trial c}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ou}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 r}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t, the learned Chief }{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 Magistrate}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 r}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ad through the records and also read the judgment and on the evide}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 nce as a whole he found that the}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 respondents}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 roved their case and }{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 therefore}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the judgment of \line trial Magistrate and the learned Chief Magistrate could not be impeached. It was not true that the learned Chief Magistrate did not consider the rest of the five grounds of appeal. He prayed th}{ \insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 at the application be dismissed. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9529856 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Section 232 (3) (}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 4) of the Magistrates Court Act 1970 }{\insrsid2761014 allows }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 a second a}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 pp}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eal with leave only, if the appellant satisfied a }{ \insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 Chief}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Magistrate or the High Court that the decision against which an appeal is intended involves a substantia}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 l question of law or decision ap}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 pearing to have caused a substantial miscarriage of justice. This section has already been referred to in my ruling above and it was r}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 produ ced here for the sake of emphasis. It would however mean tat the question of law involved or the miscarriage of justice occassioned should be of the nature that would affect the validity of}{\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 the decision from which the app}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eal was made. An irregularity was n ot material to the case and would not suffice. The appellant must show that if the error ad not occurred, the decision of the trial court would have been different }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 See Lulenti Buluma and }{ \ul\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 another}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 vs }{\ul\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 Erinesti Mbirika R}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e}{\ul\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 ported 1975 H}{ \ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 CB }{\ul\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 p}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 age 42. Also See James Bunwavs Byayeshiyimbaho 1976 HCB}{\ul\insrsid10845472\charrsid2761014 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 P. 22 }{ \insrsid9529856\charrsid2761014 where it was held that the pow}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 er to grant leave to appeal is re}{\insrsid9529856\charrsid2761014 stricted to matters involving a substantial q}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 uestion of law or where the decision to be appealed against appears to have caused a substan}{\insrsid9529856\charrsid2761014 tial miscarriage of justice. }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Thus before leave is granted those two conditions must be fulfilled by the grounds on which leave to appeal is sought. And this leave to appeal could be granted for considerati}{\insrsid9529856\charrsid2761014 on of a limited Question only. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 When submitting on}{\insrsid9529856\charrsid2761014 the first}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ground Mr. Zehukirize }{\insrsid9114219\charrsid2761014 representing}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the applicant submitted that the decision of the learned }{\insrsid9114219\charrsid2761014 Chief}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Magistrate involved important points of law whether the respondent who had no letters of Administration could sue and recover land and whether a def ective plaint was an irregularity. Mr. Nyakabwa representing the respondents submitted that there was no point of law involved here. The land had }{\insrsid9114219\charrsid2761014 t}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 o}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 be lived on and that the respondents could not go for letters of Administration when they had been pushed out }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the land. And that the procedure in the Magistrates Grade II}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 and}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \line III were simple and }{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 n}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ot}{ \b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 complicated and }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 as}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 such the joinder or}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 misjoinder of the pa}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 rties was not an irregularity. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 In his judgment th}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 e trial Magistrate allowed the 1}{\super\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 st}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent to sue the}{ \insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 applicant on behalf of the 2}{\super\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 nd}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent as next friend }{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 under R}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ule }{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 7 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of schedule }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 3 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the Civil Procedure rules}{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 for courts presided over by Mag}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 istrate Grade III and II and further held that the claim was governed by customary law and dismissed the claim }{\insrsid14097459\charrsid2761014 by the learned counsel representing the app }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 licant that th}{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 e Civil Procedure rules applied}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 before }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 qua}{ \insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 lified Magistrate & }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 judges was irrelevant and that section 190 of the succession Act was inappropriate and }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 inapplicable}{\b\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 in the circumstances. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5255800 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Rule }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 7}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the schedule }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 3}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 supra}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 simply state}{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 s that no suit may be defeated by reason of a misjoinder or non joinder of parties. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Mr. Zehurikize while submitted on this ground }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 criticized}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the learned Chief Magistrate of }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 considering only one ground }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 out of the six grounds listed for }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 . He never considered the rest and }{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 even }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 never evaluated the }{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 evidence}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 . That failure to consider the other five grounds in the memora}{\insrsid5255800\charrsid2761014 ndum of appeal occassioned a miscarriage}{ \insrsid6300988\charrsid2761014 of justice. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 In }{\insrsid6300988\charrsid2761014 reply Mr. Nyakabwa submitted tha}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t the learned Chief Magistrate read through the proceedings and judgment of the trial Magistrate and found }{ \insrsid6300988\charrsid2761014 that}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 on the evidence as a whole found that the }{\insrsid6300988\charrsid2761014 judgments of the learned Chief M}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 agistrate and the trial Ma}{ \insrsid2761014 gistrate should}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 not}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 be impeached. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 As indicated above the applica}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 nt listed six grounds in hi memorandum}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 . I am reprod}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 ucing the same here:- \par They were namely:- \par }\pard \s15\qj \li720\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid3555618 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (i) The tr}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 ial Magistrate erred in law in }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 proceedings wi}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 th the case which was based on a defective plaint. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (ii) The trial Magistrate erred in law and fact in holding that the disputed Kibanja belonged to }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 R}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 uhweza while the evidence clearly showed that it belonged to the late Ibrahim Rutugura and the }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 appellant was the Administra}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 tor of the E}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 state of the said late Ibrahim Rutagira. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (iii) That the trial Magistrate erred in law and fact in believing the evidence of the plaintiff and the witnesses when such evidence was full of material discrepancies and contradictions as opposed to the defence evidence which was straight forwar}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 d \line corroborative and truthful. \par (iv) }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 That the tr}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 ial Magistrate erred in law in }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 entering ju}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 dgment for the plaintiff who purported}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 t}{\insrsid2761014 o be suing for the recovery of }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the late Ruhweza}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 \rquote }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 s estate. }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014

\par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid3555618 {\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 And}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the court may in every suit deal with the matter in }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 dispute}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 so far as regards the rights and interest of the parties actually before it. I am of the opinion that th}{ \insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 e trial Magistrate rightly allowed}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the first respondent t}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 o sue as next friend of the 2}{\super\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 nd}{ \insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 respondent and rightly}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 held that was an irregularity which could be ignored because all that was }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 required}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was to settle the dispute between the parties. Rules of Civil Procedure are a guide to the orderly disposal of suits and a means of}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 achieving justice between the parties. }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 They should however never be used to deny justic}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 e to a party entitled to a remedy (}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 See }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Allen Nasanga vs M. Nanyonga 1977 HC}{ \ul\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 B}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 3}{\i\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (Civil App. No. 13 of 1977)}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 so my finding was that the defective was an }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 irregularity }{\ul\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 Also see Iron v Steelwares Ltd vs C. }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 W. Maxty}{\ul\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 &}{ \ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Co. }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 1958}{\i\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 23 EACA P. 175. }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 However the }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 appellant}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ha}{\insrsid2761014 d in his possession letters of }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Admin}{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 istration to the estate of one R}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 uhingira the brother of Ruhweza the }{\insrsid3555618\charrsid2761014 deceased father of the 2nd respondent}{\insrsid2761014 . The letters of }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Administration were exhibited }{\insrsid4218829\charrsid2761014 in the}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 lo}{\insrsid4218829\charrsid2761014 wer court as }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 Ex P. 2. }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The learned Chief Magistrate did not consider at all this important aspect of the case. True t}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 he trial court treated the land as governed by customary law but he }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 learned Chief Magistrate could not have overlooked the possession }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 of}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 letters of }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 Administration by the applicant. H}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e ought to have consi}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 de}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 r}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 d that issue. The }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 question}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of law involved here was of the nature that it would affect the validity of the decision from which the }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 made. } {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The first ground of the a}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 pplication therefore succeeds. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid856982 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The second ground was whether the }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 decision}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the learned Chief Magistrate caused a substantial miscourage of justice. }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li720\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid856982 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (v) That the trial }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 m}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 agistrate}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 erred in law and fact in taking the 1st Plaintiff }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 as}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{ \insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 the guardian of Christopher Friday the 2}{\super\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 nd}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Plaintiff wh}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 en}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 such claim was based on a false and forged document and it was clear that the said}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 first plaintiff was only intere}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 st}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 e}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 d in acquiring the land for the }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 erson}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 al benefit. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (vi) And }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 that the decision of the trial Magistrate}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 was bad in }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 law}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and }{ \insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 against}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 weight of }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 evidence and such caused a miscarriage of }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 justice. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid856982 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 As already e}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 xplained abov}{\insrsid2761014 e the learned Chief Magistrate }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 considered only the first ground of }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and rightly found that some of the defects in the }{ \insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 plaint}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 were }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 not material sinc}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 e they did not take the plaint out of the provisions of the u1e in schedule III }{ \insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 o}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 f the MCA 1970 and al}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 so rightly held that the Civil P}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 rocedure }{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 Rules and Civil Proc}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 edure}{\insrsid856982\charrsid2761014 Act}{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 r}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 eli}{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 ed on}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 b}{ \insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 y the counsel fo}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 r }{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 the }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 respondent }{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 were }{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 not applicable to the trial Court.}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Then the }{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 learned Chief Magistrate held that on the e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 vidence as a }{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 whole}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the respondents }{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 proved their case }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 and thereafter proceeded and di}{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 s}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 mi}{ \insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 ss}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ed the ap}{\insrsid2260152\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 eal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \line }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 considering grounds 2 to}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 6}{\i\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of the memorandum of appeal. }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Well be that as it}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 may the Chief Magistrate\rquote s cou}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 r}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 t }{\insrsid2761014 being the }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 court of first }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 appeal}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 it was the duty of}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 that}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\insrsid2761014 Court to submit the }{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 the evidence to fresh and exhaustive examination and evaluation and to make its own findings as}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 well as draw its own conclusions}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 in order to determine whether the findings and judgment of the trial court be supported }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 See Management Training Advisory Centre vs Patrick }{\ul\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 Ikan}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 za}{\ul\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 CAU }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 at Mengo Civil Appeal No. }{\i\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 6 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 of }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 1985}{ \i\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 (unreported) See also peters v }{\ul\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 Sunday}{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Po}{\ul\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 st}{ \ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 _1}{\ul\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 958 }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 EAU 24. }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8407676 {\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 In the instant case the }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 learned}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 Chief Magistrate never submitted the evidence o}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 f the trial court to fresh and exhaustive s}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 crutiny evaluation and to make his own finding as we ll as draw his o}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 wn conclusion in order to determ}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ine whether the judgment of the }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 Magistrate Grade III. \par The trial}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 court was supported by the evidence on record. Merely to say that the evidence on }{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 the}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 whole the learned Chief Magistrate was satisfied with the judgment of the tria}{\insrsid8407676\charrsid2761014 l court was not enoug}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 h. He ought to have evaluated the evidence }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 on record and drew his own find}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 ings and conclusion. In }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 the}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 result the applicant had shown }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 that if the learned Chief M agistrate}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 had evaluated the evidence as explained above}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 .}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 The decision might}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 have been different. \par }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 In conclusion I am satisfied th}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 at the decision against which an}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 appeal is intended involved a substantial poi}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 nt of law and is a decision appe}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 aring to have }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 caused}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 a substantial mi}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 scarriage of justice. Leave to ap}{ \insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 p}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 e}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 al to this court is granted with costs, t}{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 o the applicant. The Applicant/}{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 intending appellant to lodge in his }{\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 appeal within 21 days from today. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li5760\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin5760\itap0\pararsid2761014 {\insrsid2761014\charrsid2761014 \par I. MUKANZA \par }{\ul\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 JUDGE }{\insrsid9193239\charrsid2761014 \line 21/2/91 \line \par }}