Bartholomeo Albert v. Mutagobwa (PC) 286-M-69; 26/1/70; Seaton J.

Bartholomeo Albert v. Mutagobwa (PC) 286-M-69; 26/1/70; Seaton J.

In civil suit in the primary court brought by the first respondent against the second and third respondents for redemption of a clan shamba worth Shs. 2,000/- the court found that it was not a clan shamba but gave judgment for the first respondent on the ground that the shamba had been wrongly sold while he was in possession. The appellant at the time of this judgment was overseas and on his return after some more that five months applied to appeal out of time on the ground that the had purchased the shamba in question for Shs. 3,00/-. The district court dismissed the application for being some five months out of time and also because the appellant was not a party to the suit before the primary court.

            Held: (1) Matters urged in explanation of delay must be supported by affidavit. (2) “None of the parties involved in the civil suit appealed from the judgment of the primary court, presumably being satisfied. The appellant now claims in his memorandum of appeal that the shamba, which was the subject of that civil suit, was purchased by him for Shs. 3,000/- which he paid in cash. If this were so, the appellant might have a remedy against one or more of the respondents but he should seek his remedy by instituting a fresh suit against whomever he paid Shs. 3,000/- as purchase money rather than attempting to intervene at this stage in the already completed suit. Had he completed his studies in time, he might have been allowed by the primary court to intervene in the suit before it. Unfortunately, it is too late now.” (3) Appeal dismissed.