Whether or not the people enjoys matrimonial possessions of course sure, whether the petitioner was eligible to a percentage on matrimonial assets?
A-try is made to define the definition of ‘matrimonial property’ because of the Ladies Justice Esther Kisakye when it comes to Rwabinumi Versus. Bahimbisomwe Civil Notice No. 10 off 2009 where she quoted that have acceptance the truth away from Muwanga Against.
“matrimonial house is understood differently because of the different people. Almost always there is possessions that couple chose to telephone call domestic. There is certainly assets which is often acquired by themselves of the per mate in advance of otherwise once marriage. Then there’s property and that a husband can get hold in believe on clan. Each one of these will be in my view qualify in different ways. The property to which for every single partner might be entitled would be the fact property hence people made a decision to name home and you may that they jointly sign up to”.
With regards to the facts towards the list, this new petitioner affirmed one on the lady ire Trade Heart collaborating since the a family powering a whole sale shopping shop and soon after together bought property regarding a single Hajji Badru Sande which in fact had a home in it. New arrangement off selling is adduced inside the evidence while the EXHP1. She next reported that once they gone to live in Rukungiri, it purchased even more items of belongings including, homes out of a single John Kabareebe, (Display P2), another bought of the respondent out-of John Kabareebe, (Exhibit P3) yet other as one purchased out-of F. Mugondo in which they oriented the fresh matrimonial household(come across Showcase P4). She as well as displayed photos of the property as EXHP20 and you will receipts of some of the things that she sold in our house due to the fact EXHP21 (a), (b) and you can (c). She at exactly the same time adduced EXHP5 as the an agreement to possess belongings bought because of the respondent out of Mugume Polly on which he’s got good banana plantation, EXHP6 once the land purchased jointly of W. Rushakama which also has an effective banana plantation and EXHP7 since homes ordered from the respondent away from Nshijja .Grams in which they grown nice carrots.
The fresh petitioner as well as testified that the few later transferred to Kampala and in their sit with her already been coping for the promoting automobiles of whoever proceeds they purchased a taxi which they as well as offered regarding and soon after already been running a store. They then ordered six items of homes a couple of having properties therefore the other people plantations. That EXHP10 was christianconnection mobile a binding agreement for homes purchased because of the petitioner out of a-one Byangwanye Obed, yet EXHP11 is for land bought as one in the people out-of this new later Levi Butumanya, EXHP12 because the belongings ordered as one off Kalumba Faisal which has home-based site within Nateete and EXHP13 since proof of belongings in the Kiwatule together purchased from Kalyegira Adone and you may which includes homes and you can property.
The fresh petitioner further adduced proof of a contract (EXHP14) where the brand new respondent paid the shop from inside the Ntinda so you can this lady and just have adduced proof of receipts on book she paid for the store since the EXHP15 (a) and you will (b). She testified that after the fresh new respondent was launched out-of prison, he broke the store, loaded much of merchandize on it onto a trailer and took these to Rwashamire where the guy install other store, but later on moved the goods so you can Rukungiri. She reported that experience since the thieves on Kiira path Police route vide SD Ref./2010.