By Andrew Irumba
Kampala: Meera Investments has continued to prove the nation as the rightful owners of Plot 24, Kampala Road, Kampala.
The property in question has previously been subjected to a court case LD CR No. 16 of 2012, the matter then was raised as a Judicial Review for the court to determine the owner of the property.
On the other hand, DAPCB claims that some companies and individuals including Sudhir’s Meera Investments acquired some properties of departed Asians illegally, and that the Board considers their repossession audit and verification of fraudulent.
On Wednesday 14 August 2019, Meera investment petitioned the speaker of Parliament Rt Hon Rebecca Kadaga seeking for Clarification and guidance whether Parliament can inquire into a matter where decision of Court had been made.
Meera also wanted clarity whether when matters in court come to an end, parties can come to parliament for another decision..
Under Parliamentary rules and procedures Parliament cannot inquire on matters in Court of Law, equally does Parliament have the power to change a decision of Court.
It should be noted that Meera Investments Limited has been mentioned as part of the COSASE inquiry but according to records there is an order issued in 2012 by the High Court Land Division, in a ruling on Meera Investments versus DAPCB.
According to reports, the Uganda High Court Land Division directed the Departed Asians Property Custodian Board to cease the enforcement of its decisions of June 6, 2012 against Meera Investments.
The then Justice Joseph Murangira, quashed the decision of the Board that had stopped Meera Investments from developing the land comprised in Freehold Register volume 1082 Folio 1 plot 24 Kampala Road which was made and created without jurisdiction, irregularly and illegally rendering it as a nullity.
The judge noted that the evidence on record by the applicant which was not challenged by the respondent is to the effect been in physical possession of the suit property with the knowledge of the respondent since 1994 to date.
“From that year to June, 2012 the time the respondent expressed interest in part of the suit land is over 18 years. More still the applicant in 1995 with the knowledge of the respondent as shown in the unchallenged evidence by the respondent, the applicant purchased the suit property from the original owners,” justice Murangira ruled.
In his Judgement, Justice Murangira said that Meera Investments approached the former owners of that land Rameshchandra Bhowan Kataria and the late Kershavlal Premchard Shah before they were granted a certificate of repossession and they agreed to sell their estate and interest that is the property. Indeed they sold and transferred to Meera Investments.
“This is reflected in the respondent’s letter dated January 5, 1995 (repossession certificate is dated March 31, 1995) signed by Mr Sam Male although he has since changed in the respondent’s affidavit in reply,” the judge added.
The judge also stated that the documents of evidence presented in court by Meera investments show that Sudhir bought the property from the original owners. Furthermore, the authenticity of these documents was not challenged by the respondents (DAPCB) and were therefore are taken to have been admitted by the respondents.
“An order of prohibition against the respondent (DAPCB) to stop enforcement of the above decisions is granted to the applicant (Meera Investments). The respondent is accordingly prohibited from enforcing its decisions as against the applicant,” Justice Murangira ruled.
Since that ruling in 2012, there have not been any appeals for the matter and so the court order still stands confirming that the land belongs to Sudhir/Meera Investments.
