- Case summary
- Court considered whether the first defendant had capacity to purchase the suit property and whether the registration of the first defendant had been by fraud. Court held the first as having no capacity and that its registration on the suit property had been by fraud. Court was satisfied from its findings that the first defendant was just trade name and not a company and hence could not own property. Furthermore it was court’s finding that the first defendant’s registration had been through fraud as the second defendant had been dishonest by presenting false information at registration of the suit property. For that matter the plaintiffs were entitled to an award of Ugandan shillings 30million for the inconvenience and it was declared that the purported sale to the first defendant had been null and void hence the order to have the certificate of title cancelled. Accordingly court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs.
Loading PDF...
This document is 5.1 MB. Do you want to load it?