Lagoro Holdings Ltd v Transami Holdings (U) Ltd (MISC. APP. NO. 470 OF 1998) [2002] UGHC 136 (13 July 2002)

Full Case Text

DRAFT 470 98

*f*

#### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

### MISC, APPL NO.470 98

(Arising From Civil Suit No.96 93)

LAGORO HOLDINGS LTD APPLICANT

## VERSUS

TANSAMI HOLDINGS (U) LTD RESPONDENT

BEFORE: S, ARACH-AMOKO THE HON. LADY JUSTICE M.

# RULING :

This is an application by Notice of Motion under Order 9 Rule 20 and Order 48 Rules l'-\*and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for order that:-

1) the dismissal of Civil Suit No.96/1993 be set aside

2) the costs of the application be costs in the cause.

The application is supported by the affidavit of Kinyera P'lodi, counsel for the applicant sworn on the 23rd of June 1998.

*Slrv* O /" C-Mr. John Mary Mugisha, learned counsel for the Respondent sw/e on- cXn

CERTIFIER. DEPUTY REGISTRAR IRECT affidavit in reply on behalf of the Respondent. The said affidavit does not bear a date of swearing. It therefore contravenes Section 8 of the Oaths Act which provides that:-

> Every Commissioner for Oaths or notary public $18$ before whom any Oath or affidavit is taken or made under this Act shall state truly in the Jurat or attestation at what place and on what date the Oath or affidavit is taken or made."

An affidavit which does not comply with Section 8 of the Oaths Act See: - Jeddy is incurably defective and the court cannot rely on it. Namazzi-vs- Assesibo (1986) HCB 58. and Haji Yusuf Luyonubo-vs- Masaba Co-operative Union CS No 487/94. The main ground for the application is that Civil Suit No 96 $\ell$ /1993 was not cause listed for hearing on the 18th June 1998, that is why counsel for Applicant/Plaintiff was absent in court when the case was dismissed.

In order for an application to succeed under Order 9 Rule 20 of the Civil Procedure Rule, the applicant must satisfy court that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance. See Order 9 Rule 20 and Teddy Namarzi Teddr Hamazsi to Bibo - Bibo - Bibo - Bibo and $supra)$ .

In this particular case I have checked $\bullet$ the cause-list of 18.6.1998 HCCS No.96/1993 - Lagoro Holdings vs Tansami (U) Ltd

$\overline{2}$ CERTIFIED-CORRECT DEPUTY REGISTRAR

was on the Cause List of that date on page 5. It was Cause-listed as the second suit before the Hon. Justice Akiiki Kiiza (Ag) as he then was.

It is not therefore true to say that the suit was not on the causelist . In the circumstances, since no sufficient cause for the Applicant's counsel's before this court. merit I find that the application has no

The application is accordingly dismissed with costs Respondent.

Hon. M. S. Arach-Amoko

JUDGE .

### THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

## IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

## **MISC. APP. NO. 470 OF 1998 (Arising from Civil Suit No. 96/93)**

**LAGORO HOLDING LTD APPLICANT**

**VERSUS**

**TRANSAMI (U) LTD RESPONDENT**

#### **ORDER**

This application coming this 13lh day ofJuly 2002 before the Honourable Lady Justice M. S. Arach Amoko for final disposal in the presence of Kinyera P'Lodi, counsel for the applicant and J. M Mugisha, counsel for the respondent.

IT IS ORDERED that the application be and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondent.

GIVEN under my hand and the seal ofthe Court this 13111 d lily; 2000.

**DEP** Y **REGISTRAR**

**i**

**7**