Our client bought the property!
SIR— Your report in the issue of September 29, under the heading “Asian sues Katikkiro,†gave the impression that <br>our client Mr Godfrey Kavuma <br>was involved in a fraudulent acquisition of property.
SIR— Your report in the issue of September 29, under the heading “Asian sues Katikkiro,†gave the impression that
our client Mr Godfrey Kavuma
was involved in a fraudulent acquisition of property.
The correct position
is that Mr Kavuma bought
the property in question
from the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board
in 1990, having been
the highest bidder in
an auction that
had been widely advertised.
Subsequently, however,
in 1993 the Minister
of Finance issued a certificate
of repossession
to the former Asian owner
and purported to cancel
our client’s title.
The issue before the court, therefore, is whether
the minister’s action
can have the effect of cancelling the title of a bona-fide
purchaser
for value without notice
of any kind.
The impression given
in the article that Mr Kavuma was in any way amiss
in acquiring the title should be corrected.
Peter Mulira
For Mulira & Co. Advocates
Kampala
our client Mr Godfrey Kavuma
was involved in a fraudulent acquisition of property.
The correct position
is that Mr Kavuma bought
the property in question
from the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board
in 1990, having been
the highest bidder in
an auction that
had been widely advertised.
Subsequently, however,
in 1993 the Minister
of Finance issued a certificate
of repossession
to the former Asian owner
and purported to cancel
our client’s title.
The issue before the court, therefore, is whether
the minister’s action
can have the effect of cancelling the title of a bona-fide
purchaser
for value without notice
of any kind.
The impression given
in the article that Mr Kavuma was in any way amiss
in acquiring the title should be corrected.
Peter Mulira
For Mulira & Co. Advocates
Kampala