Nabuguzi v Sempa (Misc Cause 27 of 2023) [2023] UGHCLD 135 (24 May 2023)

## THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

### IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA

## (LAND DIVISION)

## MISCELLANEOUS CAUSE NO.0027 OF 2023

$\mathsf{S}$

PROSSY NABUGUZI:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

#### **VERSUS**

10 SEMPA PATRICK::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

# Before: Lady Justice Alexandra Nkonge Rugadya.

## Ruling.

The brought this application under the provisions of **Section 98 of the**

- Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71, and Order 52 rules 1, 2, & 9 of the Civil 15 **Procedure Rules SI 71-1** seeking orders that; - 1. A consequential order be issued directing the respondent to submit to this court a certificate of title for land at Kyanja-Kampala comprised in Block 195 plot 3056 as ordered by this court on 29<sup>th</sup> April 2016 vide Civil Suit No. 148 of 2013 (now Civil Suit No.891 of 2017); - 2. Costs of the application be provided for.

# Grounds of the application:

The grounds upon which the application is premised on are contained in the $25$ affidavit in support thereof deponed by Ms. Prossy Nabuguzi, the applicant

Ochoef

herein who stated inter alia that on 29h April 20 16, this court issued an order in Ctull Sult No.748 oJa 2013.

I have carefully read the arguments by both sides and I have noted that an order among others were issued by the court in the family division which directed the respondent herein to submit to this court the certificate of land of land at KganJa-Kampala comprlsed ln Block 795 plot 3O56 (hereinafier refened to as the 'suit land')before 31"t May 2016.

It is not in dispute that the respondent was not party to Ctull Sutt No.148 oJ 2013. Ir is also not in contention that another suit Ciuit Sutt No.891 of

2O77 rn which the respondent was a party was dismissed on 16e October, 2020for want of prosecution; and Mlscellaneous Appllcatlon No.36 of 2O21 for its reinstatement was dismissed on 18m Apr1l,2023. 10

Under order 22 tlule 7 where a holder of a decree desires to execute it, he or she shall apply to the court which passed it. The applicant herein therefore seeks execution of an order that was issued by the family division, vide Ciuil Sult No,748 of 2013 which issued the orders which the applicant seeks to enforce.

The application is therefore improperly before this court and is therefore dismissed.

20 It is therefore dismissed with costs.

a g&P

25 Alexandra Nkonge Rugadga Judge

24th Mag, 2O23

<sup>I</sup>so order. bvc E 1,1 t4,,', v, 0 U u-I',d'