[2023] UGHCLD 386

[2023] UGHCLD 386

The court found that while the applicant's compensation sum of UGX 119,154,737 was indeed part of the total sum deposited in court by the respondent, the repeated applications by the applicant were not the proper procedure to conclusively resolve his entitlement. The respondent did not dispute the inclusion of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] UGHCLD 386
Parties
Applicant: Donozio Musisi Sekyaaya; Respondent: Uganda National Roads Authority
Court
HC: Land Division (Uganda)
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Number
Misc Cause 2721 of 2023
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Confirmation and Payment of Compensation
Outcome
application dismissed
Judges
Naluzze Aisha Batala, J
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Compensation Disputes, Kibanja Rights, Court Deposit Procedure
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Compulsory Acquisition Compensation Disputes Kibanja Rights Court Deposit Procedure

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donozio Musisi Sekyaaya

Applicant

Uganda National Roads Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Cause / Ruling on Application for Confirmation and Payment of Compensation

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's compensation sum of UGX 119,154,737 formed part of the total compensation sum of UGX 723,694,720 deposited in court by the respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to payment of the compensation sum from the monies deposited in court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that while the applicant's compensation sum of UGX 119,154,737 was indeed part of the total sum deposited in court by the respondent, the repeated applications by the applicant were not the proper procedure to conclusively resolve his entitlement. The respondent did not dispute the inclusion of the applicant's compensation in the deposited sum. However, the court held that the applicant's rights and entitlement to the compensation could only be satisfactorily determined through an ordinary suit where all relevant parties could be joined and evidence adduced. The application was therefore dismissed as lacking merit, with the court emphasizing that further applications on...

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • The application is dismissed for lack of merit.
  • No order as to costs.