Nganda v Ddibya & 3 Others (Originating Summons 4 of 2021) [2023] UGHC 410 (8 August 2023)

# **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA**

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT MASAKA**

# **ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO. 4 OF 2021**

**DAVID NGANDA MUJUULI …………………………….…….………… APPLICANT**

### **VERSUS**

## **1. DDIBYA EDWARD**

- **2. NAMULONDO FLORENCE** - **3. NAKYAZZE FLORENCE** - **4. KATIMBO…………..….…………………………………………….. RESPONDENT**

**(Co-Administrators of the estate of the Late Nganda Edward Mujuuli)**

#### **RULING**

*Hon. Lady Justice Victoria N. N. Katamba*

# **BACKGROUND**

The Respondents were appointed Administrators to the estate of the Late Nganda Edward Mujuuli about 10 years ago. The Applicant has brought the instant Application under S.82(b) and S.98 of the Civil Procedure Act Cap. 71 and Orders 42 r1 (b) r2 & 8 of the Civil Procedure Rules for a declaratory order that the Respondents are in breach of their administration duties and any other relief that this court may deem appropriate.

The Applicant states that since granting of the order of Letters of Administration to the estate, the Respondents have distributed some of the estate properties among the beneficiaries but have omitted to give them certificates of titles. The Applicant also complains that the Respondents have completely neglected to distribute some of the estate properties among the beneficiaries and have also omitted to file an inventory in this Honourable court as required by law.

In their reply, the Respondents have admitted to having omitted to file an inventory and for having distributed only some but not all estate properties and have cited some reasons for the same for instance in respect to the Kaganda- Bisanje LC1 property, the Respondents contend that the family agreed to preserve it as a burial ground. They also contend that the same land lies in a protected

wetland and the distribution may put them in NEMA's bad books. NEMA is National Environmental Management Authority charged with conserving the environment. In respect to the land in Kyoko village, the Respondents contend that it is occupied by squatters and that they delegated their duty in assessing its prospects to the Applicant who failed to report to them.

### **Representation**

The Applicant was represented by **M/s Denis Kakeeto Advocates**.

The Respondent was on the other hand represented by **M/s Xander Advocates**.

When this matter came up for hearing the parties were directed to file written submissions and the Applicant complied with the directive. His submissions have been considered in the writing of this Judgment.

### **APPLICANT'S SUBMISSIONS**

The Applicants submitted that the Respondents breached the provisions of *Section 278 of the Succession Act which are mandatory, which bound the administrators to administer the estate according to the law by filing true inventories and accounts pertaining to the estate as stated in the case of* **Richard Babumba &Ors Vs James Ssali Babumba Cs No 78 Of 2012.**

The Applicants cited the Respondents omission to file an inventory and the admission to not have distributed some of the properties that form part of the estate of the Late Nganda Edward Mujuuli in the grant issued on 24th January 2011.

In conclusion, the Applicant prayed that this court finds the Respondents in breach of their duties.

### **DETERMINATION BY COURT**.

I have carefully read and considered the Originating summons, the affidavit in reply and the submissions of the parties.

The only issue for determination, is;

### *Whether the Respondents are in breach of their Administration duties?*


The Respondents have admitted to having omitted to file an inventory as required of them to have done so within 6 months after the grant and another one after one year. Their reason for the omission is that they did not know that they were required to file them.

*Section 278 of the Succession Act provides that the executor or administrator to an estate shall, within six months from the grant of probate or letters of administration, or within such further time as the same court may from time to time appoint, exhibit an inventory containing a true and full estimate of all the property in possession, and all credits and debts owing by any person to which the executor or administrator is entitled in that character, to the court which granted the probate or letters of administration. In the same manner, the executor or administrator shall, within one year or such other time as the court may from time to time appoint, exhibit an account of the estate, showing the assets which have come to his or her hands, and the manner in which they have been applied or disposed of.*

As correctly reported by the Applicant, the requirement to file an inventory is mandatory. *See Paulo Kavuma V Moses Sekakya & Another Civil Suit No. 473/1995*

I therefore agree with the submissions of the Applicant that filing of an inventory is mandatory. I also add that ignorance of the law is not a defence for an omission or conduct that contravenes the law.

The Respondents also admitted that they have notdistributed some of the estate property for the reasons highlighted earlier. I am of the opinion that however meritorious, if at all, the reasons for not distributing those properties are, the same are not a justification for the omission to file an inventory. The purpose of filing an inventory is to give accountability to the appointing authority (the court), the beneficiaries and any other interested members of the public. Therefore, the Respondents ought to have filed the inventory and reported to the court the agreements of the family members on the undistributed properties and contentions over the same.

In conclusion, I find that Applicant is entitled to the declaratory relief sought. The Respondents shall file an inventory in this court and serve the Applicant a copy of the same within fourteen (14) days from the date of delivery of this Ruling. The Respondents shall within three months from the date of this ruling, distribute the estate and file a distribution memorandum. They shall enable the process of the beneficiaries acquiring titles by signing mutation forms and transfers to them. The


beneficiaries shall bear the costs of acquiring their respective titles. The Respondents shall inform the beneficiaries what is required of them to produce the titles.

The parties being family members, I am enjoined by the Constitution of Uganda 1995 to encourage reconciliation among the parties and as such I will make no order as to costs.

I so order.

Orders;

- 1. It is hereby declared that the Respondents breached their Administration duties in failing to file an inventory within the time allowed by law. - 2. The Respondents shall file an inventory in this court and serve the Applicant a copy of the same within fourteen (14) days from the date of delivery of this Ruling. - 3. The Respondents shall distribute the estate within three(3) months from the date hereof and sign mutations, transfers and consents to the respective beneficiaries. - 4. Each party shall bear their costs of this Application.

Dated and delivered electronically this 8th day of August, 2023


# **HON. LADY JUSTICE VICTORIA NAKINTU NKWANGA KATAMBA**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_