Yusuf Ssekakozi v Ssekakozi Yusuf and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 3720 of 2025) [2025] UGHCFD 62 (15 July 2025)

#### **THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA (FAMILY DIVISION) MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 3720 OF 2025 (ARISING FROM ADMINISTRATION CAUSE NO. 836 OF 2011) IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF LATE AUSI NSIRIKOMAWA KIZZA. FORMERLY RESIDENT OF KIGGWA, BUSUJJU, MUBENDE DISTRICT, MITYANA DISTRICT. AND IN THE MATTER OF LETTRES OF ADMINISTRATION GRANTED TO YUSUF SSEKAKOZI (GRANDSON)**

**AND**

# **IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION AND LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE AN INVENTOY OUT OF TIME AND TO AMEND THE PETITION.**

**YUSUF SSEKAKOZI :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: APPLICANT**

#### **VERSUS**

- **1. SSEKAKOZI YUSUF** - **2. KIRIGGWAJJO GOLDEN** - **3. NAKITENDE REHEMA** - **4. BIRABWA FATUMA** - **5. JALIYA NABALINDWA** - **6. MULINDWA BAKER representing the family of the late Mulindwa** - **7. MUSISI IVAN representing the family of the late MUSISI ABBEY** - **8. MUSISI MOSES representing the family of the late MUSISI MUKOMYA DIRIISA** - **9. KAKONGE HARUNA representing the family of the late ASUMAN LWANGA** - **10. DEEZI NAMULINDWA representing the family of the late NJALA YOWANA :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: RESPONDENTS**

# **BEFORE: HON LADY JUSTICE IMMACULATE BUSINGYE BYARUHANGA**

# **RULING**

# **Introduction**

This application was brought by way of Notice of Motion under Section 34(3) of the Interpretation Act, Section 273, 337(2) and (4) of the Succession Act Cap 268, Sections 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 52 rules 1 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules S1 71-1seeking for orders that; -

- 1. That leave be granted to the applicant to file an inventory and final account out of time and amend the petition accordingly in respect of the late AUSI NSIRIKOMAWA KIZZA vide administration cause No. 0836 of 2011. - 2. That the letters of administration granted to the applicant vide HCT -00-FD 0836 of 2011 be extended/ renewed. - 3. That costs to this application be provided for.

The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by **YUSUF SSEKAKOZI the** applicant herein and the holder of letters of administration granted vide Administration Cause No.836 of 2011. The grounds of the application are laid out in the application and the affidavit in support of the application but briefly they are the following;

- 1. That the applicant obtained letters of administration for the estate of the late AUSI NSIRIKOMAWA KIZZA vide Administration Cause No. 0836 of 2011. - 2. That the letters of administration were granted on the 12th March, 2012. - 3. That the deceased produced only one child and he also passed the above are granddaughters and grandsons and great grandsons and daughters. - 4. That according to their culture, they make distribution after the last funeral rights of the deceased and that took so long that delayed the process of the administration.

- 5. That the majority were infants that gave them confusion in the distribution and management of the estate. - 6. That the applicant was still solving the family issues that were hindering the distribution of the estate of the late AUSI NSIERIKOMAWA KIZZA. - 7. That at the time of obtaining the grant, there was no strict enforcement to file inventories and accounts. - 8. That the applicant is desirous of issuing transfers in favor of the beneficiaries but the same cannot be accepted in land office minus an inventory and account. - 9. THAT lack of finances to enable us transfer the land within the prescribed time. - 10. That as of now the applicants have not completed the distribution of the said estate and seek for court's leave to file the inventory out of time. - 11. That it would be fair and just that the applicant is allowed to file an inventory of the estate of the late AUSI NSIERIKOMAWA KIZZA out of time.

# *Background*

Following the demise of the Late **AUSI NSIERIKOMAWA KIZZA** on the 7 th day of April, 1972, the applicant petitioned this court for letters of administration to administer the estate of the deceased on behalf of his beneficiaries. The same was granted on the 12th day of March, 2012 by **JUSTICE MOSES MUKIIBI**. However, contrary to the requirements of **Section 337 of the Succession Act Cap 268 as amended**, the said letters have expired and contrary to the requirements of **Section 273(1)** (formerly section 278(1) **of the Succession Act** (as amended), the applicants have not filed an inventory and a final account within the requisite time, hence this application.

# *Representation*

In the instant application, the applicants were self-represented.

#### *Issue for Determination*

In accordance with the applicant's submissions, this court has resolved that the main issue for resolution is*, Whether the applicant should be granted an extension for letters of administration in respect of the estate and leave to file inventory out of time*

# *Parties' submissions*

It is the applicant's submission that the applicants have sufficient cause for want of extension of letters of administration that some property of the estate was discovered and it has taken time to trace other properties that belonged to the deceased's estate and that it is in the best interest of the beneficiaries to extend the period and they clearly consent to the application.

#### *Resolution*

# *Whether the applicant should be granted an extension for letters of administration in respect of the estate and leave to file inventory out of time*

**Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Act,** vests inherent jurisdiction in this court to enlarge time. Similarly, **Section 98 of the Civil Procedure Act** provides that court has inherent power to make such orders as maybe necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of court process. in the same spirit, **Section 37 of the Judicature Act Cap 16** provides that the high court shall, in the exercise of the jurisdiction vested in it by the constitution grant absolutely or on such terms and conditions as it thinks just all remedies to any legal or equitable claim properly brought before it.

Applications of this nature wherein letters of Administration for the deceased's estate were issued before 31st May 2022, as is in the instant case, where the same were issued on 12th March 2012, are provided for under **Section 337 (2) of the Succession Act Cap 268** which stipulates that;

"A grant of Probate or letters of administration issued by a court of competent jurisdiction before the 31st day of May 2022, shall remain in force for a period of three years from the 31st day of May, 2022".

**Section 337(4) of the Succession Act Cap 268** allows for extensions of grants that fall within the ambits of subsection 2 and it states that**;**

*"The duration of a grant of probate or letters of administration referred to in subsection (2) may on application to court by the administrator or administratrix of an estate, be extended for a reasonable period determined by court."*

According to paragraphs 4-6 of the affidavit in support of the application, it was deponed that the applicant has just cause to warrant an extension of the grant of letters of administration for the deceased's estate which have lapsed by operation of law. It was further deponed that delays in distributing the estate of the deceased were occasioned by the delay in conducting the last funeral rites of the deceased which dictated when the distribution would be done coupled with the minority age of some of the beneficiaries and family wrangles in the deceased's family. In addition, in paragraphs 8-9 of the same affidavit, it was deponed that the applicants desire to transfer the estate property to the respective beneficiaries, however, financial constraints hindered this process. it is my considered opinion that the reasons furnished amount to sufficient cause.

I have also observed from the petition for letters of administration vide Administration Cause No. 836 of 2011 that the deceased is survived by 21 surviving beneficiaries, some of whom consented to the instant application for extension of the letters of administration and equally attached their identification documentation. Though not a requirement of law by virtue of Section 337 of the Succession Act, it is beneficial to have family consent as the same is proof that the beneficiaries of the deceased's estate have endorsed the actions of the executors or administrators of the deceased's estate.

In light of the evidence before me, I am a braced with the fact that the estate of the deceased vests in the Administrators of the said estate as the legal representatives in accordance with **Sections 176 and 188 of the Succession Act,** therefore, without operative letters of administration, the estate is left without legal representatives to finalize the administration of the deceased's estate. In the premises, I am convinced that the applicant has presented sufficient cause to warrant an extension of the letters of administration for the **Estate of Late Ausi Nsierikoma Kizza issued via Administrative Cause No. 0836 of 2011.**

In regards to the inventory, **Section 273(1)** (formerly section 278(1)) **of the Succession Act** (as amended) provides that*:*

*"An executor or executrix or administrator or administratrix shall, within six months from the grant of probate or letters of administration, or within such further time as the court which granted the probate or letters may from time to time appoint, exhibit in that court an inventory containing a full and true estimate of all the property in possession, and all the credits, and also all the debts owing by any person to which the executor or executrix or administrator or administratrix; is entitled in that character; and shall in like manner within one year from the grant, or within such further 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."*

In the case of **Hadijah Ndagire & anor V Muhammad Kasozi & Ors HCCS No. 40 of 2014**, court stated that, *the prescribed period for filing an inventory is six months. If the administrator finds herself unable to file the inventory within the prescribed time, she/he is duty bound to apply to the court which issued the grant for extension of time, stating the reasons for her/his inability to perform the required task within the 6(six) months period. The court, if persuaded by the administrator's grounds for extension of time, may grant the application.* The case of **Molly Kyalikunda Turinawe & others vs Engineer EphraimTurinawe & Anor – SCCA No. 27 of 2010** provided for the 3 questions to be determined before disposing of an application for extension of time like this one. The said questions are;

- *1. Whether the Applicant has established sufficient reasons for the court to extend time* - *2. Whether the Applicant is guilty of dilatory conduct* - *3. Whether any injustice will be caused if the application is not granted.*

Similarly, in the case of **Mugo and ors vs Wanjiru & another [1970] EA 481 at page 484** it was stated that; "*each application must be decided in the particular circumstances of each case but as a general rule, the applicant must satisfactorily explain the reason for delay and should also satisfy court as to whether or not there will be a denial of justice by the refusal or granting of the application" (emphasis on the underlined)*

In the case of **The Registered Trustees of the Archdiocese of Dar es Salam v. the Chairman Bunju Village Government & Ors** which quoted **Gideon Mosa Onchwati v. Kenya Oil Co. Ltd & Anor [2017] KLR** where it was stated,

*"it is difficult to attempt to define the meaning of the words sufficient cause. It is generally accepted however, that the words should receive a liberal construction in order to advance substantial justice, when no negligence or inaction or want of bonafides is imputed to the appellant."*

I agree with the definition of sufficient cause stated above. Courts have the discretion to determine what amounts to sufficient cause and in the cases of estate property, the Applicant must show that the reason for the delay in filing an inventory was beyond his or her control and it was not because of negligence or unreasonable delay. I have examined the reasons furnished by the applicant and I am satisfied that the same qualify as sufficient cause to extend time within which to file an inventory. I accordingly allow this application with a finding that the present application merits extension of time within which to file an inventory.

In these premises, the Applicant's application succeeds and I hereby order as follows;

- *1) Application allowed.* - *2) The Applicants are granted leave for renewal /extension of letters of administration of the estate of the Late Ausi Nsierikomawa vide administration cause No. 836 of 2011 and are extended for one year effective 15 th July 2025.* - *3) The Applicant is granted leave to file the inventory vide Administration Cause No. 0200 of 2003 out of time.* - *4) The Applicant is directed to file the updated inventory clearly showing the following;* - *a) the name of the deceased; date of death; Administration Cause number; Date of Issuance of the Letters of Administration; Names of Administrator; Date of Submission of Inventory.*

- *b) Properties that formed part of the deceased's estate as at the date of death. For immoveable properties, attach certified documentary evidence and for moveable properties, a list with details and descriptions. A status update of these properties should be given as at the date of filing of this inventory.* - *c) Credits of the deceased* - *d) Debts of the deceased* - *e) List of beneficiaries of the deceased and their National IDs* - *f) Proposed distribution of properties among the beneficiaries and justification for this proposed distribution i.e. family minutes consenting to the proposed distribution, duly signed by the beneficiaries and the Administrators.* - *g) For property already distributed before the filing of the inventory, a list of properties distributed and to whom it was distributed among the beneficiaries and a justification for the distribution and proof that the said beneficiary received the same.* - *5) The said inventory should be filed within 90 days from the date of this Ruling.*

I so order,

# **Immaculate Busingye Byaruhanga**

# **JUDGE**

Ruling delivered on this **15 th day** of **July**, **2025** via ECCMIS