Proceedings in a civil suit challenging the administration of two-family estates involving Mpigi High Court Judge Deepa Verma have stalled after the case file was reportedly called by the Principal Judge there by delaying the hearing of the matter as scheduled.
The parties on Wednesday appeared before the Deputy Registrar of the High Court Family Division, His Worship Samuel Olumo for summons for directions.
However, according to one the applicants Bunny Wallia, the proceedings could not take place because the case file had been called by the Principal Judge, who is expected to give further directions on the matter.
Bunny has told Trusted News Uganda that the parties only learnt that the file was unavailable when they reported to court for the scheduled proceedings.
“We were supposed to appear before the Deputy Registrar at 3:00pm for summons for directions, but unfortunately the file had been called by the Principal Judge,” Bunny said.
He explained that although they appeared in court as required, they were informed that the file was away and that nothing could be done in its absence.
He said the parties were now awaiting feedback from the chambers of the Principal Judge regarding the next course of action.
It remains unclear why the Principal Judge called for the file or what specific directions may be issued. No new hearing date or further court orders had been communicated by the time of filing this report.
The civil suit was filed by Bunny Wallia and Ahluwalia Jaspal against Judge Verma, the Administrator General and another family member over the contested administration of the estates of the late Zura Mama Kasuku and Ahluwalia Gudo.
Verma is the second respondent in the case, in which the applicants are questioning the circumstances under which Certificates of No Objection were issued by the Administrator General in favour of Verma and Jassa Wallia, paving the way for them to commence proceedings to administer the two estates.
According to court documents, the dispute dates back to June 12, 2026, when the respondents allegedly initiated the processing of files relating to the estates at the Office of the Administrator General.
The applicants contend that on the same day, the Administrator General, Victor Manzi, conducted or supervised a family meeting concerning the estates, which they claim was attended by only four people.
Bunny Wallia and Jaspal allege that they were neither invited nor notified about the meeting, alongside other family members whom they say have legitimate interests in the estates.
They argue that the meeting was not representative of the wider family and could not fairly determine who should be entrusted with administering the deceased persons’ properties without considering the interests of all known beneficiaries.
Three days later, on June 15, 2026, the Administrator General allegedly issued Certificates of No Objection in favour of Verma and Wallia concerning the two estates.
The applicants are now asking the High Court to examine whether the certificates were issued after adequate verification of the relevant documents, identification of beneficiaries and compliance with the required legal and administrative procedures.
A central issue raised in the suit is the involvement of Verma, who is a serving High Court Judge stationed at Mpigi.
The applicants say they are not seeking to interfere with judicial independence or prejudge any matter pending before another judicial officer. However, they argue that a serving judge’s involvement in seeking administration of family estates raises questions about transparency, disclosure, propriety and the possible appearance of a conflict of interest.
They want the court to establish whether Verma’s judicial position was disclosed during the processing of the estates and whether her official status, influence or prestige was invoked, directly or indirectly, in obtaining the Certificates of No Objection.
The applicants also want the court to investigate whether there was any improper communication or collaboration among the respondents and whether the information presented to the Administrator General was complete and accurate.
They further allege that some properties which may not belong to either deceased person’s estate could have been included or represented as estate property.
The disputed estates are reportedly located in Mbarara City, with one of the properties housing Manji Memorial Secondary School.
Following the issuance of the Certificates of No Objection, Verma and Wallia reportedly commenced administration proceedings in the High Court Family Division. These are Administration Cause No. 599 of 2026, relating to the estate of the late Ahluwalia Gudo, and Administration Cause No. 600 of 2026, concerning the estate of the late Zura Mama Kasuku.
The applicants say they only became aware of the proceedings around July 10, 2026, after notices concerning the cases appeared in the New Vision newspaper.
They contend that the administration process had already commenced without their knowledge or participation, despite their claimed interests in the estates.
They are particularly concerned that the estates could be administered without the participation of all lawful beneficiaries and that property could be sold, transferred, charged or otherwise disposed of before their interests are determined.
Through the civil suit, Bunny Wallia and Jaspal are seeking declarations that the process leading to the issuance of the Certificates of No Objection was irregular, unlawful or procedurally defective.
They want the High Court to set aside or quash the certificates issued in favour of Verma and Wallia and order a fresh process of identifying the rightful beneficiaries and persons entitled to administer the estates.
They are also seeking orders preserving the disputed properties and restraining the respondents, their agents or representatives from selling, transferring, charging or disposing of assets belonging to the estates pending lawful administration.
Other remedies sought include general, aggravated and exemplary damages, interest, costs of the suit and any other relief the court considers appropriate.
The value of the subject matter of the suit is stated to exceed 210 million shillings.
