Edube and Another V Mohamed and 2 Others (Civil Suit No.571 of 2020) [2022] UGHCLD 59 (13 April 2022)

### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT IIAMPALA

### (LAND DTVISION}

# crvlL suIT No.571 0F 2020

#### 5 1. EDUBE ABDU

/

2. ABDITAM FAMI MOHAMED::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PLNNTIFFS

### VERSUS

1. ISMNL MOHAMED

#### 10 2. LUBEGA MOHAMED

3. CHRISTOPHER MUBIRU DEFENDANTS

## Before: Justice Alexand.ra Nkonoe Rusad.ua.

## Rullnq.

15 This matter was filed on 19s August 2020. From the record, the lst and 3'd defendants filed their respective WSDs on 1't September, 2O2O and 2"d September, 2020 respectively. There is nothing on record to show that the 3'd defendant filed his written statement of defence.

On 2"d October, 2027,lhe 2nd defendant through his lawycrs M/s Lukuago & Co. Adtocates wrote to this court notifying the Deputy Registrar that the suit had since abated since the

20 plaintiffs had not taken out summons for directions within the 28 days stipulated under O"d,er XIA (2) of the Clall Procedu"e Amendment Rules 2079; and prayed for the same to be dismissed.

The record upon perusal of the file however indicates that the plaintiffs had not taken out summons for directions since there is no evidence of the same. It is upon that basis that

25 court on 1O1h November, 2O21ruled that the suit had indeed abated and dismissed the same rlnder Order XIA (2) of the Clull Procedure Anendment Rules 2079.

The plaintiffs through their lawyers M/s Mukiibi & Kyegune Aduocates by way of letter dated 12rh November, 2O21, notified this court that thc plaintiffs had taken out the summons for directions on 141h December,2O2l, within thc statutory pcriod and requested that the

30 orders of this court dismissing the suit be sct aside and thc suit be reinstated.

This court has since established through the office of the Deputy Registrar that the plaintiffs had through their Iawyers taken out sLlmmons for directions which had been filed on 14th December, 2020 but the same had been taken to the wrong chambers.

In light of the above, I find that Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 was dismissed inadvertently since it had not been aware of that fact.

Under Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act, Cap. 71 this Court has power to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court.

In the circumstances, the order dismissing Civil Suit No.571 of 2020 is hereby discharged and the suit is accordingly reinstated.

No orders as to costs.

I so order.

Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya Judge 13<sup>th</sup> April 2022

$\mathsf{S}$

Deliverd by email<br>Amberg J.<br>13/4/2022.