The story started in 1976 when Nsamba and Sseguya’s father, Yozefu Katoto, bought the eight acres from Edward Solomon Mbuku Luwagga Baliruno for Shs4,000.
He paid Shs3,900 in instalments, built his home on the land and lived there until he died in 1993.
After his death, the sons asked Baliruno’s children for the title deed. They were told the estate was still getting a grant of administration and would deal with the request later.
The family stayed on the land.
Then, in 2019, the village vice chairperson called Nsamba and Sseguya to a meeting at Sagala. He told them the title had been mortgaged to Tropical Africa Bank for a Shs5 million loan.
According to the bank, the loan was taken in 1996 by a woman named Janet L Chota. She used powers of attorney dated October 14, 1993, which were supposedly signed by Baliruno. The bank put a caveat on the land.
When the sons tried to lodge their own caveat, the Land Registry refused because of the bank’s mortgage. In 2020, they said the bank’s agents told them to leave so the land could be auctioned. They sued.
Their lawyers, from Tumwebaze, Kasirye & Co Advocates, told the court that Baliruno could not have signed the powers of attorney since his death certificate showed he died in 1981. They said the bank never produced a loan agreement or any proof that the money was paid out.
The bank, represented by GP Advocates, said Chota presented the documents, got the loan, and disappeared without a trace without paying a single instalment.
Tropical Bank’s lawyers argued that Nsamba and Sseguya had no right to sue because they were not the registered owners. They said Baliruno’s estate should have been joined to the case.
They also said the old land number was not the same land as Busiro Block 532 Plot 33, and that the buyer’s part payment meant the land had returned to the seller, making the family ‘trespassers’.
They described Baliruno’s death certificate and grant of probate as “manipulated documents,” calling a family witness an impostor.
They added that the missing loan papers did not cancel the ‘equitable mortgage’ created when the title was handed over.
His car was clamped as he rushed sick daughter to clinic. He went to court and lost
In the end, Justice Mubiru agreed with the family on almost every point. He found that the old and new land descriptions referred to the same plot, noting that Tropical Bank produced no survey report, no land registry search to show otherwise.
On the 1976 sale, he said the buyer, Katoto, had paid 97.5% of the price to Baliruno.
“This is a textbook case of waiver under well-established equitable principles,” Justice Mubiru ruled.
The heart of the ruling was the missing debt of Shs 5 million. The bank’s recovery officer, Stella Nansamba, admitted the loan application and offer letter could not be found.
The book that supposedly recorded the cash payout was never shown to court, and she could not say when the loan was due to be repaid.
“A mortgage is, by definition, a security for a debt. If there is no debt, there can be no mortgage,” Justice Mubiru said, adding that Chota’s silence did not help the bank’s cause.
On the power of attorney, he said the bank offered nothing to show Baliruno was alive in 1993.
“A power of attorney executed by a deceased person is, in legal effect, a forgery; the signature cannot be genuine because the person was dead,” he ruled.
He also noted that it carried only “Edward Baliruno”, not the owner’s full name: Edward Solomon Mbuku Luwagga Baliruno.
The bank’s counterclaim against Nsamba and Sseguya also failed because it came too late. The law gives 12 years to recover money secured by a mortgage. He said the clock started in 1996 and ran out in 2008, yet the claim was filed in 2021, about 13 years out of time.
Justice Mubiru declared the mortgage void and ordered the caveat removed. He said the bank must hand the title to the Commissioner for Land Registration at the Wakiso District Land Registry within 30 days, and the registrar will release it to the brothers.
He awarded Shs40 million to Nsamba and Sseguya in general damages with 6% yearly interest from October 22, 2026, plus costs of the suit and the counterclaim.
The brothers had asked for exemplary damages, but Justice Mubiru refused, saying the bank’s behaviour reflected “institutional negligence and bureaucratic inertia”, not a plan to profit from wrongdoing.
