News
Supreme Court halts transactions on prime Kampala land
“An interim order does issue staying the execution of the orders pending the determination of the substantive application for stay of execution before this court. The interim order does hereby preserve the existing status quo and the parties are hereby directed to refrain from taking further steps in relation to the suit property,” Justice Mugenyi said
According to court records, the dispute dates back to January 31, 2008, when the applicant was registered as the proprietor of the disputed property, LRV 145 Folio 22 on Berkeley Road in Kampala, after purchasing it from Humphrey Katarikawe in December 2007.
By: Edward Anyoli, Journalist @New Vision
KAMPALA - The Supreme Court has issued an interim order blocking any transactions involving prime land on Berkeley Road in Kampala pending the determination of an appeal over its ownership.
Justice Monica Mugenyi, on July 2, 2026, directed that no transactions be undertaken in relation to the disputed property on Berkeley Road in Kampala pending the determination of the appeal.
The application, filed by Sunny Katongole, arises from a long-running ownership dispute over the property that dates back to 2008.
According to court records, the dispute dates back to January 31, 2008, when the applicant was registered as the proprietor of the disputed property, LRV 145 Folio 22 on Berkeley Road in Kampala, after purchasing it from Humphrey Katarikawe in December 2007.
However, Katongole argued that she later discovered that a consent judgment entered in Civil Revision Number Fourteen of 2009 among the three respondents, which include Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA), Kenneth Mabongo and Shirinkhanu Murad Ali Fazal Jiwani, had ordered the cancellation of all entries on the property's title and the reinstatement of ownership in the name of Shirinkhanu Murad Ali Fazal Jiwani.
Subsequently, a special certificate of title was reportedly issued on September 26, 2007.
A consent judgment is a legally binding court order that settles a lawsuit through a mutual agreement between the parties rather than through a trial.
In 2015, Katongole challenged those orders before the High Court through a judicial review application, but her case was dismissed. She subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal, which, on February 23, 2026, upheld the cancellation of her registration as the property's owner.
However, Katongole argued that she later discovered that a consent judgment entered in Civil Revision Number Fourteen of 2009 among the three respondents, which include Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA), Kenneth Mabongo and Shirinkhanu Murad Ali Fazal Jiwani, had ordered the cancellation of all entries on the property's title and the reinstatement of ownership in the name of Shirinkhanu Murad Ali Fazal Jiwani.
Subsequently, a special certificate of title was reportedly issued on September 26, 2007.
A consent judgment is a legally binding court order that settles a lawsuit through a mutual agreement between the parties rather than through a trial.
In 2015, Katongole challenged those orders before the High Court through a judicial review application, but her case was dismissed. She subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal, which, on February 23, 2026, upheld the cancellation of her registration as the property's owner.
A judicial review focuses on how a decision was made rather than whether the final outcome was right, ensuring authorities stay within their legal powers.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Katongole appealed to the Supreme Court and filed an application seeking a stay of execution of the Court of Appeal's judgment pending the determination of her appeal.
She argues that the interim order is necessary to preserve the status quo while the Supreme Court considers the substantive appeal.
The Supreme Court granted her application, on the grounds that it was necessary to halt further transactions and preserve the status quo pending the determination of the substantive case.
“An interim order does issue staying the execution of the orders pending the determination of the substantive application for stay of execution before this court. The interim order does hereby preserve the existing status quo and the parties are hereby directed to refrain from taking further steps in relation to the suit property,” Justice Mugenyi said
Dissatisfied with the decision, Katongole appealed to the Supreme Court and filed an application seeking a stay of execution of the Court of Appeal's judgment pending the determination of her appeal.
She argues that the interim order is necessary to preserve the status quo while the Supreme Court considers the substantive appeal.
The Supreme Court granted her application, on the grounds that it was necessary to halt further transactions and preserve the status quo pending the determination of the substantive case.
“An interim order does issue staying the execution of the orders pending the determination of the substantive application for stay of execution before this court. The interim order does hereby preserve the existing status quo and the parties are hereby directed to refrain from taking further steps in relation to the suit property,” Justice Mugenyi said