Court grants departed Asians properties board relief in Jinja property row

Jinja High Court has issued an Interim Order in a suit filed by the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board (DAPCB) against businessmen Musa Balikowa and Moses Emma Gamwanga.
The interim order was issued on Tuesday by Jinja High Court Judge, Faridah Shamilah Bukirwa, in regard to property located at Plot 54 Main Street East, which is being sought by both parties.
“It is hereby ordered that an Interim Order is hereby granted restraining the Respondents from sale, mortgage, transfer, disposal, eviction, demolition, threats, intimidation and any other form of interference with regard to the property located at Plot 54 Main Street LRV 154 Folio 17 pending the determination of the main suit,” the interim order reads in part.
But while the main suit is being determined, the property has been undergoing demolition since December 30, 2022, according to Mr Wilson Hamia Mulongo, who claims to have been a tenant for two decades.
“I am just a tenant and not interested in grabbing any property; I am ready and willing to pay whoever claims true ownership,” Mr Mulongo told Justice Bukirwa during a locus visit to the contested property on Wednesday.
The ownership of the property is shrouded in mystery after Mr Hirome Sabbehe Mayanja, a member of Divestiture Committee in the Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development, said the original owner has never picked a repossession certificate.
“When the DAPCB finalised with repossession in 1993, this property wasn’t yet repossessed,” Mr Mayanja said, adding that the original owner of the property, a one Kotchecha, has never returned to Uganda since then President, Idi Amin Dada expelled Indians in 1972.
“Mr Kotchecha last applied through his embassy, but didn’t come back to pick the repossession certificate. The law gives up to 120 days for one to pick and manage property, and once that period elapses, it automatically reverses to the government,” he added.
Mr Sharif Ssemaganda, the DAPCB lawyer, said their mandate is to keep the property and give it to the rightful owners after they have submitted the necessary documentation.
“The DAPCB isn’t claiming property, but defending property until the rightful owner comes on board,” Mr Ssemaganda told Justice Bukirwa, adding that, “The property, just like nearly all others, had a mortgage before the Indians were expelled.”
Mr Davis Guma, representing the Respondents, however, told Justice Bukirwa that a certificate of repossession was issued to the original owner of the property by the Ministry of Finance on April 19, 1993.
“Once a certificate of repossession has been issued, the DAPCB ceases to manage that property,” Mr Guma submitted. He, however, said his clients had no possession of any document authorising occupancy.
[email protected]