Opedo & 16 Ors Vs Kiconco (Civil Revision No.33 of 2018) [2018] UGHCLD 63 (14 December 2018)

Flynote

Civil Procedure

Case summary

Concerning the issue of service of summons, the process server stated that he served the summons with the help of the plaintiffs’ agent whom he did not mention. The court found that the LC1 Chairperson was not an agent of the applicants and thus service was deemed ineffective.   Further on the issue of visiting the locus, the court found that had the trail court visited the locus, it would have alerted the applicants and others who occupied the land that there was a case against them, so as to file their defense.   Lastly, on the issue of execution, the court found that the execution was a nullity as it was based on the decision of a court which had no jurisdiction. The court further noted that there was contention as to which land the court bailiffs carried out the execution.   The trail court, therefore, exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it in law. The trail court judgment and the execution process was therefore set aside.

---