Appeal court upholds Soroti University land ownership in Aputon dispute
The appellants, Augustine Erimu, William Oceng, Geresem Eotu and Charles Okia, had challenged the High Court judgment delivered in March 2023, arguing that the land was fraudulently acquired by Soroti University and claiming it belongs to their community under customary tenure.
Appeal court upholds Soroti University land ownership in Aputon dispute
___________________
The Court of Appeal has upheld a High Court decision confirming Soroti University as the lawful owner of Plot 51, Block 7 in Aputon village, Soroti district, ending a long land dispute with four claimants who had asserted customary ownership.
The appellants, Augustine Erimu, William Oceng, Geresem Eotu and Charles Okia, had challenged the High Court judgment delivered in March 2023, arguing that the land was fraudulently acquired by Soroti University and claiming it belongs to their community under customary tenure.
The dispute arose from land located in Aputon village, Arapai subcounty, where the appellants said they and their ancestors had occupied and cultivated the land for decades, including maintaining homesteads and burial grounds.
Through its lawyer, Phillip Engolu, the university argued that it lawfully acquired the land through established government processes, including a lease arrangement and transfers between public institutions, and that no objections were raised during the earlier allocations.
The High Court had earlier dismissed the appellants’ counterclaim, finding that Plot 51 legally belonged to Soroti University and that there was no evidence of fraud in its acquisition.
On appeal, the appellants insisted they were customary owners and accused the university of illegal acquisition and trespass, arguing that they were never compensated or consulted during land surveying.
However, the university countered that the appellants failed to prove how their alleged customary rights were acquired and maintained that the land was public property vested in government institutions long before the university’s establishment.
The court further held that Soroti University’s interest in the land was legally traceable through government allocations and could not amount to trespass.
It also dismissed allegations of fraud, noting that no sufficient evidence was adduced to prove illegal acquisition of the land by the university.
In their decision, the justices found that the appeal by the claimants lacked merit and accordingly dismissed it, awarding costs to the university. The ruling, delivered on April 30, 2026, confirmed Soroti University’s ownership of the contested land at Plot 51, Block 7.
“Pursuant to the foregoing analysis, this appeal lacks merit, and it is hereby dismissed with costs,” Justice Nakachwa said.