The Court of Appeal has ordered former minister, Israel Mayengo, to sell half an acre of his land in Muyenga to John Lwalanda as per their earlier oral agreement. The decision, issued on August 11, ends a long-running dispute over an oral land deal gone sour.
The case started in 2009 when Lwalanda sued Mayengo in the High Court. Lwalanda claimed they had verbally agreed to the sale of land in Kyadondo Block 244, Plot 2611, for Shs 110 million in cash plus an exchange of Lwalanda’s land in Bukasa, valued at Shs 60 million.
Lwalanda told court he paid Shs 50 million upfront, handed over his Bukasa land title, and even helped subdivide the plot with Mayengo’s approval. However, Mayengo later refused to accept the remaining payment or sign the final transfer papers.
MP Anna Adeke loses Shs 200 million in gold exploration deal
Mayengo denied a binding deal existed, calling the price just a “starting point for talks.” He argued there was no written contract, no clear terms, and offered to refund the money instead.
In 2016, the High Court sided with Lwalanda. Judge Eva Luswata ruled that the pair’s actions—such as Mayengo accepting payments, signing forms for land subdivision, and taking Lwalanda’s title—proved a valid agreement and partial fulfillment.
She ordered Mayengo to sign over the land after Lwalanda pays the balance of Shs 78.89 million, removes any barriers blocking access, and pays Shs 10 million in damages plus court costs.
Unhappy with the outcome, Mayengo appealed, claiming the judge ignored key laws, misused past cases, and wrongly ordered the sale to go through.
But in the appeal judgment, led by Justice Musa Ssekaana and supported by Justices Asa Mugenyi and Stella Alibateese, the court rejected all arguments.
They found strong evidence of a deal through the parties’ behaviour, like payments and land surveys.
“The conduct of both sides showed they had agreed and started acting on it,” the judgment stated, emphasizing that oral deals can be enforced if actions back them up.
The judges also said land is unique, so simply refunding money would not be fair—Lwalanda deserved the actual plot he bargained for. Mayengo was ordered to follow the High Court’s orders and pay appeal costs too.
This ruling is significanr because it re-enforces the fact that verbal land agreements, if there’s clear proof of intent and partial steps taken, even without a signed paper, are valid.
Lwalanda’s lawyer, Moses Opio, had argued in court that his client could not back out of the deal after so many years, while Mayengo’s counsel, Mudde John Bosco, wanted at least a refund.
Mayengo lost.
