+256-770-955-129
·
info@atiakmagistrate.com
Mon - Fri 08:00-17:00
·

Oyat Clement & Makwindi Moses (Applicants) Vs Tumwine James (Respondent)

Brief Background

The respondent sued the applicants through summary procedure under the provisions of Order 36 of the CPR for recovery of UGX 8,500,000/= being initial deposit on a purchase of land, the transaction of which later failed to materialize. The suit was supported by an affidavit deposed by the respondent herein.
Civil CaseSUIT NO. 006 of 2022
Date2022, 2023
Magistrate G.1H/W Kyembe Karim

Summary:

The respondent opposed the application and on 21st February, 2024, filed an affidavit in reply deposed by himself. I will not reproduce the entire content, but the gist of his averment is that the applicants were served personally through their known Watsapp telephone numbers, and also physically in the presence of the local council authorities. That the applicants were also served with notices to show cause why execution should not issue, which they ignored and acted in a dilatory manner and that the instant application is only an afterthought conveniently crafted in bad faith with design to waste this hon. Court’s time.

The respondent attached annexures “A”, “B” & “C”, which are, respectively, an affidavit of service of summons together with pictorial evidences thereof in proof of the process of service, a letter applying for default judgment and an affidavit of service of the notice to show cause deposed by a one, Oloya John.

FULL RULING:

Download Here: RULING.SET ASIDE JUDGEMENT. CIVIL FINAL_102640