Haruna Serunjogi v George William Kijjambu (Civil Appeal No. 33 of 2002) [2005] UGCA 78 (14 July 2005)

{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f49\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;} {\f50\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f52\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;}{\f53\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f54\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);} {\f55\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f56\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;}{\f57\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\trcbpat1\trcfpat1\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{ \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext15 \styrsid10167411 Normal (Web);}} {\*\latentstyles\lsdstimax156\lsdlockeddef0{\lsdlockedexcept Normal;heading 1;heading 2;heading 3;heading 4;heading 5;heading 6;heading 7;heading 8;heading 9;toc 1;toc 2;toc 3;toc 4;toc 5;toc 6;toc 7;toc 8;toc 9;caption;Title;Default Paragraph Font;Subtitle;Strong;Emphasis;Table Grid;}} {\*\pgptbl {\pgp\ipgp0\itap0\li0\ri0\sb0\sa0}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid357166\rsid1725259\rsid5320315\rsid5571561\rsid8739038\rsid10167411\rsid12080206\rsid12343391\rsid12796538\rsid13004570}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 11.0.5604;}{\info {\title THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA }{\author Administrator}{\operator Sheila}{\creatim\yr2010\mo5\dy28\hr11\min12}{\revtim\yr2010\mo5\dy28\hr11\min12}{\version2}{\edmins4}{\nofpages8}{\nofwords2457}{\nofchars14009}{\*\company acer}{\nofcharsws16434} {\vern24689}}\margl1440\margr1440 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\hyphcaps0\formshade\horzdoc\dgmargin\dghspace180\dgvspace180\dghorigin1440\dgvorigin1440\dghshow1\dgvshow1 \jexpand\viewkind1\viewscale100\pgbrdrhead\pgbrdrfoot\splytwnine\ftnlytwnine\htmautsp\nolnhtadjtbl\useltbaln\alntblind\lytcalctblwd\lyttblrtgr\lnbrkrule\nobrkwrptbl\snaptogridincell\allowfieldendsel\wrppunct \asianbrkrule\rsidroot10167411\newtblstyruls\nogrowautofit \fet0\sectd \linex0\endnhere\sectlinegrid360\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid12080206\sftnbj {\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid8739038 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid8739038 }{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA \line IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA \line }{\i\insrsid357166 \par }\pard \s15\ql \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid357166 {\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid357166 CORAM: }{\b\insrsid357166 \tab }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid357166 HON. JUSTICE L. E. M. MUKASA KIKONYOGO, DCJ }{\b\insrsid12343391\charrsid357166 \par }\pard \s15\ql \fi720\li720\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin720\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid357166 {\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 HON. JUSTICE }{\b\insrsid12343391 A. TWINOMUJUNI}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 , JA \line }{\b\insrsid357166 \tab }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 HON. JUSTICE C. K. BYAMUGISHA, JA \line }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 \line }{\insrsid8739038 }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 CIVIL APPEAL NO.33 OF 2002}{\b\insrsid12343391 \par }\pard \s15\qc \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12343391 {\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 BETWEEN \line }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 \line }{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 HARUNA}{\b\insrsid12343391 }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 SERUNJOGI }{\b\insrsid12343391 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{\b\insrsid357166 \'85\'85\'85..}{\b\insrsid12343391 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85 \'85..}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 APPELLANT \line AND }{\b\insrsid12343391 \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 GEORGE WILLIAM KIJJAMBU }{\b\insrsid12343391 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{\b\insrsid357166 \'85\'85\'85}{\b\insrsid12343391 \'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85\'85}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 RESPONDENT \line (An appeal from the decision of the \line High Court of Uganda at Kampala in \line }{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\b\insrsid12343391 the Judgment of (H}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 onourable Lady Justice Anne Magezi) \line delivered on 26/10/2001)}{\insrsid12343391\charrsid12343391 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12343391 {\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 JUDGMENT OF TWINOMUJUNI, JA }{\b\insrsid12343391 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The appellant is the registered owner of Pl}{\insrsid357166 ot No.3 87, Kibuga Block No.18 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 situated at Natete in Kampala District. The land was originally bought by the mother of the appellant and registered in his names in 1975 when he was aged }{\insrsid12343391 2 1}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 /2 years old. Between 1976 and 1991}{ \insrsid12343391 one Ahmed Katende, the father }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 of the appellant, not only purpor}{\insrsid12343391 ted to sell developments on the}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 land to the respondent but actually illegally and unsuccessfully tried to sell and transfer the land to him. In 1991 when the appellant attained the age of maturity, he was then serving in the Army a}{\insrsid12343391 nd did not return till 1994. He }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 then found - that the respondent had lodged a caveat on the suit land. He started to claim the land only to learn that the land }{\insrsid12343391\charrsid12343391 title}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 was actually in }{\insrsid12343391\charrsid12343391 possession}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 of the respondent. It seems Ahmed Katende hand}{\insrsid12343391 ed it over to the respondent as}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 security for a loan, which he failed to repay and tried to transfer the land to the respondent. In 1996 the parties entered into negotiations for sale or leasing the land to the respondent but could not agree on terms which were set by the appellant. The appellant asked the respondent to vacate }{\insrsid12343391 the land but the respondent refu}{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 sed. The appellant obtaine}{\insrsid12343391 d a duplicate land title to }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 the land in 1999 and fil}{\insrsid12343391 ed this suit in the year 2000. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 In the trial court, the trial judge upheld the appellant\rquote s claim to the land and held that the respondent was trespasser and had no claim of right to the land. She made the following orders:}{\insrsid12343391

\par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid357166 {\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 a) The defendant sha}{\b\insrsid12343391 ll vacate the land in dispute. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 b) A permanent injunction shall restrain the re-entry of the}{\b\insrsid12343391 defendant upon the suit land. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 c) The defendant pays the plaintiff general damages of shs.2}{\b\insrsid12343391 ,000,000/=}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 .}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid12343391 \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 d) That the improvements made on the b}{\b\insrsid12343391 uildings that were found there }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 could be detached or otherwise}{\b\insrsid12343391 compensated by the plaintiff. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 e) The defendant pays the plaintiff the costs of the suit. }{\b\insrsid357166 \par \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 She declined to grant an order for payment of}{\insrsid12343391 mesne profit in respect of the}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 use of the buildings on the land. Being dissat}{ \insrsid12343391 isfied with this judgment, the }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 appell}{\insrsid12343391 ant appealed on three grounds:-}{\b\insrsid12343391\charrsid357166 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12343391 {\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 1) The learned judge erred in law and fact}{ \b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 to hold he respondent made any improvements on the suit land }{\b\insrsid12343391\charrsid5571561 and is entitled .to compensate }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 therefore}{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 . }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 \par 2}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 ) The learned trial judge erred both in }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 law and fact when she declined}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 to awar}{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 d the appellant mesne profits. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 3) The learned trial judge erred both in law and fact when she ordered that the respondent be allowed to remove his developments on the land or that he be compensated for the }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 same.

\par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The respondent was also not satisfied with the judgment as a result of which he cross-appealed relying on eight grounds}{\insrsid5571561 of appeal as follows:- \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 1}{\insrsid357166 .}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when she held that at the time of the transaction }{\insrsid5571561 between the respondent and the}{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 appellant\rquote s father, the law did not allow the severance of developments on land from ownership of}{\insrsid5571561 land. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 2. In holding that the late appellant\rquote s father could not sell the houses on the land to the respondent, the learned trial judge erred in law and in fact because the learned judge ig}{\insrsid5571561 nored evidence on record which}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 proved that the late appellant\rquote s father owned the developments on the land long before the appellant was register}{\insrsid5571561 ed as the mailo owner in 1975. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 3. The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when she held that oral evidence could not be used in th}{\insrsid5571561 is case to prove the amount of}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 money paid by the respondent to the appellant\rquote s father as the purchase price which was not indicated in the acknowledgement of sale executed by the appel}{\insrsid5571561 lant\rquote s father 9}{ \super\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 th}{\insrsid5571561 October 1976. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 4. The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when after observing that the respondent had occupied the land for }{\insrsid5571561 24}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 years, went ahead to hold that the appellant was not a Bonafide occupant on the land. }{\b\insrsid5571561 \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid357166 5.}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when she held }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid12343391 that }{\insrsid5571561\charrsid12343391 the}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Limitation Act Cap. 70 no longer applies to land matters after the e}{\b\insrsid5571561 nactment of the Land Act 1998. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 6. The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when she held that the occupation of the land }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 in }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 issue by the respondent was void as against the appellant. }{\b\insrsid5571561 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 7. }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The learned trial judge erred in law and in fact when she held that the respondent}{\b\insrsid5571561 was a trespasser on the land. \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 8. The learned trial judge should have r}{\b\insrsid5571561 esolved the inconsistencies and }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 contradictions in the appellant\rquote s case especially as to who b ought the land and registered it in the names of the appellant, in }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 favour of }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 the respondent}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 . }{\b\insrsid5571561 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 On appeal, it was agreed that counsel for the cross-appellant argues his grounds first beginning with the fifth ground of appeal. This ground of appeal is to the effect that the trial judge erred }{\insrsid5571561 in law and in fact to hold that }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 the Limitation Act Cap.70 no longer applies to land matters after the enactment of the Land Act 1998. As was observed and conceded by both counsel, this matter of limitation was not raised a t all in the lower court, though it was mentioned in passing by the trial judge in her judgment. On the authority of }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 Semakula vs. Mulondo }{\b\ul\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 [}{ \b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 19851}{\b\ul\insrsid5571561\charrsid5571561 ]}{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5571561 HCB 29}{\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid5571561 a Court of Appeal }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 does not entertain grounds of appeal which raise new points of law which were not argued before the trial court. This should dispose of this ground of appeal. However, I think that on the facts of t}{\insrsid5571561 his case, the ground of appeal }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 does not even arise at all. Between 1976 and 1994 the appellant was unable to claim for his land partly because he was still a minor an}{\insrsid5571561 d after 1991, he was serving in}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 the Army. However, on his return in 1994 up to the year 2000 when he filed the suit, he - persistently claimed }{\insrsid5571561 the land and the}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 respondent cannot claim that his possession of the land was never challen ged. In fact, the respondent acknowledged that the land belonged to the appellant by trying to negotiate for purchase or leasing of land and the properties thereon. It is, therefore, not necessary to consider the merits}{\insrsid5571561 of this ground of appeal. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Mr. Bamwite who argued this appeal for the cross-appellant argued grounds one and two of the cross-app}{\insrsid5571561 eal together. He attacked the fin}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 dings of the trial court to the effect that at tile time of the transaction between the respondent and the appellant\rquote s father, the law }{\insrsid5571561 did not allow the severance of }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 is developments on the land from the ownership of the land. He also attacked the judge for ignoring evidence on record which proved that the late appellant\rquote s father owned the developments on the land long before the appe llant was registered as the mailo owner in 1975. In his view, there was evidence that the appellant\rquote s father owned d}{\insrsid5571561 evelopments on the land and }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 could sell and tr}{\insrsid5571561 ansfer them to another person. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Mr. Ojambo Robert Mugeni, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the disputed land belonged to the appellant since 1975. His father had no capacity or authority to sell or transfer any property or buildings } {\insrsid5571561 on the }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 land. The fact that he paid rates to Kampala City Council did not confer on him any right to sell or transfer the buildings to the respondent. The trial court }{\insrsid5571561 was right to hold as it did. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I have found no evidence on record to support a propo}{\insrsid5571561 sition by cou}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 nsel for the cross-appellant that Ahamed Katende, the late father of the appellant, owned a Kib anja on the disputed land. There is also no evidence that the buildings which he purported to sell were actual}{\insrsid5571561 ly constructed by him. It is }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 trite law that buildings on the land are part and parcel of the land. Since the land in dispute was at all times sinc e 1975 the property of the appellant, his father had no capacity or authority to sell or transfer any building found on the disputed land. This is how the learned trial judge disposed of this matter in her judgment:}{\insrsid5571561 \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 \'93It is apparent that apart from bein}{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5320315 g the biological father of the }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 plaintiff Mr. Ahamed Katende did not possess the power of a legal guardian or power of attorney over the land in dispute. This is irrespective of whether he is th}{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5320315 e one who bought that land and }{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 is registered it in the names of the plaintiff. Section 56 RTA provides that the person named in the certificate of Title is the proprietor and only one having any estate or interest or power to appoint, or dispose of the land therein described. The statutory implication of the aforesai d provision is t}{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5320315 hat it is only the plaintiff}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 who could sell or transfer to the defendant any interest in the disputed land. When the }{\b\insrsid5571561\charrsid5320315 plaintiffs \rquote }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 father purported to sell or mortgage the land in dispute the plaintiff, the registered owner of the land was a minor. He did not have capacity to make any legal transaction }{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 over the land in dispute.\'94 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I agree with this holding and I find no merits in grounds 1 and 2 of the cross- appeal. }{\insrsid5320315 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 In ground three of }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 the}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 cross-appeal, Mr. Bamwite complained that the tria}{\insrsid5320315 l judge erred to hold that oral}{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 evidence}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 could not be used to prove the amount of money paid by the respondent to the appellant\rquote s father }{\insrsid5320315 as the purchase}{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 price. I find no merits in this ground of ap}{\insrsid5320315 peal. The finding of the trial court, with which I concur, i}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 s that the }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 appellants \rquote }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 father had no capacity to sell anything on the land. It is, therefore, not relevant whether he received any payment for purporting to sell anything on the land. Any evidence, oral or written on this matter would be futile. What the fathe r of the appellant was doing was illegal and the cross-appellan}{\insrsid5320315 t knew it very well all along. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Mr. Bamwite argued grounds 4 and 6 together. The complaint is that after the trial judge found that the cross-appellant had lived on the land for 24 years, she s hould have found that he was a bonafide occupant of the land. The Land Act 1998 defined the term Bonafide occupant as }{\i\insrsid5320315 \'93}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 a person who before the coming into force of the Constitution had occupied and utilised or developed land unchallenged by the registered owner or agent of the registered owner for twelve years or more.\'94 }{\i\insrsid5320315 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Now, the finding of fact of the lower court and of this court is that up to 20 1991, the appellant was a minor and incap}{\insrsid5320315 able of challenging the cross- }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 appellants illegal occupation of his l and. On return of the appellant from the army, he started demanding repossession of his land. The cross-appellant acknowledged that the land belonged to appellant and started negotiating with him to purchase or obtain a lease to t}{\insrsid5320315 he land. He failed to meet the}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 terms set by the appellant. It cannot be said that the cross-appellant occupied, utilized or developed the land for }{\insrsid5320315 twelve years before the coming }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 into force of the }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 1995 }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 Constitution}{\insrsid5320315 He, therefore, does}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 no}{ \insrsid5320315 t}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 quali}{\insrsid5320315 fy to be }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 called}{\insrsid5320315 }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 a}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 bonafide Occupant}{\insrsid5320315 . This ground of appeal fails. \par Mr. Bamwit}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 e abandoned grounds No. and }{\insrsid5320315 did dot argue ground No.7 as he}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 felt he had adequately }{ \insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 covered}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 it when ar}{\insrsid5320315 guing the other grounds of the }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 cross-appeal}{\insrsid5320315 .}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{ \insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 I}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 have found no merits in a}{\insrsid5320315 ll the grounds of cross-appeal }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 which were argued. The cross-ap}{\insrsid5320315 peal is dismissed accordingly. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Now, I move to the main appeal which has three g}{\insrsid5320315 rounds already spelt out }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 above}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 . Mr. Robert Ojambo Mugeni argued}{\insrsid5320315 grounds 1 and 2 together. The }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 gist of these grounds is that since the trial judge held that the respondent was a trespasser, it was wrong for her to hold that he had made any improvements on the land which entitled him to any compensation or to be allowed to remove them from the land. He argued that there was in fact nothing to compensate because in 1976, when the respondent took possession of the property, developments were already the}{\insrsid5320315 reon. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I will dispose of these two grounds summarily. I agree with the learned trial judge that as early as 1983 when the respondent}{\insrsid5320315 tried to register the land in}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 his names, he became aware that the }{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 pu}{\insrsid5320315 r}{\insrsid5320315\charrsid12343391 ported}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 seller had no title to pass to him. He therefore knew that he was a trespasser. He is not entitled to any compensation for any developments he may ha ve made since then. If he indeed made such developments at all, they have now become part of the land unless they are not fixed on the land. It was, with respect, also }{\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 wrong for}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 the learned trial judge to order that the trespasser be allowed to remove buildings he illegally put up on th}{\insrsid5320315 e land. Moreover he was merely }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 improving on those he found on the land in 1976. These two grounds of appeal must }{\insrsid5320315 succeed. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The last ground of appeal concerned a claim for mesne profits which the trial }{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 5 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 judge rejected. Her ground for rejecting it }{\insrsid5320315 was that the claim was statute }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 barred. She did not substantiate. The learned trial judge came to that conclusion in the following way as she stated in her judgment: }{\insrsid5320315 \par }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 \'93}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 The}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 damages claimed by the plainti}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 ff included a court order that }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 th e defendant vacates the land, }{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 a permanent injunction against }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 the defendant\rquote s re-entry on the}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 suit land and order for mesne }{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 profits. The plaintiff claimed a}{\b\insrsid5320315 total of shs.70,000,000/ from }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 1976 to date having calculated the claim of shs.200,000 x 12 x 7 }{ \b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 = }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 16,800,000/=. The calculations are b}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 ased on rentals collected from }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 the houses on the land. These f}{ \b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 igures of rents earned monthly }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 were disclosed by the defence i.}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 e. DW1 Mary Nabatusa Kijjambu. }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 I have considered the plaintiffs cl}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 aim regarding mesne profits. I }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 am of the opinion that such ca}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 lculations should be guided by }{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 section 2 of the Civil Procedure Act which defines mesne profits as \'93those }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 profits which the person }{\b\ul\insrsid5320315 in wrongful possession of such }{ \b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 property actually received or mig}{\b\ul\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 ht have received with ordinary }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 diligence have received }{\b\ul\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 there from} {\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 }{\b\ul\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 together with interest on such }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 profits but shall not include profits due to improvements }{\b\ul\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 made by }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 the person in wrongful possession.\'94 }{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 Without further ado the }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 above definition excludes any clai}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 m of mesne profits because the evidence on record }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 indicates that t}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 he defendant occupied the land }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 when the houses were incomplete and made the improvements upon which the claim for mesne profi}{\b\insrsid5320315\charrsid5320315 ts were based for that reason }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid5320315 the claim is unfounded as it is statutory barred.\'94}{ \b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid5320315 [Emphasis supplied] \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 The problem really is that though the appellant pleaded a claim for mesne profits, he did not plead them specifically. He did not specify the amount he claimed or how he came to such an amount. He did not call any evidence to prove in what state the buildings were and how much money was being made form them. With respect to the learned trial judge, I do not }{\insrsid5320315 think that}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 the claim would be statute barred if the appellant had specifically pleaded it and proved it. There is evidence that the appellant started claiming his property around 1996. The claim for mesne profits would have been valid, at least from the time he filed this suit in 2000 till payment in full, if the claim had been proved. A claim for spe}{\insrsid5320315 cial damages cannot be granted}{\i\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 unless it was specifically pleaded and specifically proved. This ground of appeal must fail because mesne profits were n}{\insrsid5320315 ot proved in the trial court. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 In the result, I find that this appeal should succeed on two grounds of appeal. I would uphold the orders of the High Court}{\insrsid5320315 contained in the Decree dated}{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 }{ \insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 14th November 2001 except the one on compensation for improvements }{\insrsid5320315 or their detachment. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I would also grant the appellant 2/3 }{\insrsid5320315 of the costs of this appeal. \par }{\b\ul\insrsid357166 \par \par }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid13004570 JUDGEMENT OF L. E. M. MUKASA}{\b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid13004570 KIKONYOGO}{\b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 ,}{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid13004570 DCJ }{ \b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I had the advantage of perusing the judgement in draft prepared by Hon. Justice A. Twi}{\insrsid13004570 nomujuni JA and I agree with}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 him that this appeal must succeed. As Hon. Justice C. K. Byamugisha J. A holds a similar view the appeal is allowed with 2/3 of the costs to the appellant}{\insrsid13004570 in this court and High Court. \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 Further, the orders contained in the High Court Decree are upheld apart from the one awarding compensation on improvement or their detachment w}{\insrsid13004570 hich is, hereby, set aside. \par }{\b\ul\insrsid357166 \par }{\b\ul\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 JUDGEMENT OF BYAMUGISHA, JA }{\b\insrsid13004570 \par }{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 I had the benefit of readin}{\insrsid13004570 g in draft form the lead judgem}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 ent of Twinomujuni JA. I agree with the reasons h}{\insrsid13004570 e has given in partly allowing }{ \insrsid13004570\charrsid12343391 the}{\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 appeal.}{\insrsid13004570 I have nothing useful to add. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa240\sbauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid13004570 {\insrsid13004570\charrsid12343391 Dated at Kampala this }{\insrsid13004570 14}{ \super\insrsid13004570\charrsid5320315 th}{\insrsid13004570 day of July}{\insrsid13004570\charrsid12343391 }{\insrsid13004570 2005. \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid357166 {\b\insrsid357166 \par }{\b\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 Hon Justice Amos Twinomujuni \par }{\b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 JUSTICE OF APPEAL }{\b\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 \par }{\b\insrsid357166 \par }{\b\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 L. E. M. Mukasa Kikonyongo \par }{\b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 HON. DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICE \par }{\b\insrsid357166 \par }{\b\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 C. K. Byamugisha \par }{\b\ul\insrsid13004570\charrsid13004570 JUSTICE OF APPEAL }{\b\insrsid10167411\charrsid13004570 \par }\pard \s15\qj \li0\ri0\sb100\sa100\sbauto1\saauto1\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\ipgp1\pararsid12343391 {\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 \line \line \par }\pard\plain \qj \li0\ri0\sl360\slmult1\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid12343391 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid10167411\charrsid12343391 \par }}