Uganda High Court: Deepa Verma Estate Dispute Stalled, File Recalled

• Proceedings in a civil suit challenging the administration of two family estates involving High Court Judge Deepa Verma have stalled.
• The Principal Judge recalled the case file, preventing a scheduled hearing before the Deputy Registrar Samuel Olumo.
• Plaintiffs, including Bunny Wallia, allege irregularities in the issuance of Certificates of No Objection for the estates of Zura Mama Kasuku and Ahluwalia Gudo.
• They claim exclusion from a crucial family meeting held on June 12, 2026, and question the Administrator General's process in issuing certificates on June 15, 2026.
• The lawsuit also raises concerns about Justice Verma's role as a serving judicial officer in the estate administration.

The Principal Judge's intervention underscores the potential for high-level judicial scrutiny in estate disputes, particularly when allegations of irregularities involving public officials are made.

A civil lawsuit contesting the management of two family estates, which involves Mpigi High Court Judge Deepa Verma, has come to a standstill. Proceedings in the `Uganda High Court Judge Deepa Verma estate dispute` were unexpectedly halted after the Principal Judge reportedly requested the case file for review. This development occurred when the involved parties appeared before Deputy Registrar Samuel Olumo of the High Court Family Division for a summons for directions hearing.

According to Bunny Wallia, one of the plaintiffs, the parties were scheduled to appear at 3:00 PM but only discovered the file's recall upon arriving at court. Despite having complied with all court scheduling requirements, the proceedings could not advance due to the absence of the file. The parties are now awaiting further communication from the Principal Judge's chambers regarding the next steps in this `High Court Family Division Uganda stalled case`.

The plaintiffs, identified as Bunny Wallia, Johnny Wallia, Ronnie Wallia, and Jassie Ahluwalia, initiated legal action against the Administrator General, High Court Judge Deepa Verma, and Jassa Wallia, another family member. Their `Deepa Verma estate administration lawsuit` alleges irregularities in the administration of the estates belonging to the late Zura Mama Kasuku and Ahluwalia Gudo.

The core of their challenge lies in what they term an irregular and exclusionary process surrounding the issuance of `Certificates of No Objection challenge Uganda` to Justice Verma and Jassa Wallia. These certificates subsequently paved the way for the administration proceedings. Court documents indicate that on June 12, 2026, Justice Verma and Jassa Wallia initiated the opening and processing of files for both estates at the Administrator General's office. On the same day, a family meeting reportedly took place, attended by only four individuals. The plaintiffs contend they were neither invited to, notified of, nor involved in this purported meeting, arguing it was unrepresentative and incapable of fairly determining estate administrators. Just three days later, on June 15, 2026, the Administrator General purportedly issued Certificates of No Objection in favor of Justice Verma and Jassa Wallia. These certificates were then used to commence Administration Cause Numbers 599 and 600 of 2026 within the High Court Family Division. The plaintiffs assert they only became aware of these proceedings on July 10, 2026, following the publication of notices in the New Vision newspaper, expressing alarm at the lack of their knowledge or involvement.

The plaintiffs, who are adult family members with a legitimate interest in the estates, contend that their interests were overlooked during the processing by the Office of the Administrator General. They are seeking judicial review to ascertain whether all known beneficiaries were properly identified and informed, if the family meeting was convened appropriately, and whether the documentation submitted to the Administrator General was both complete and accurate. Furthermore, they request the court to determine if any assets not belonging to the deceased individuals were erroneously included as estate property, highlighting concerns about `Administrator General Uganda estate irregularities`.

The `Wallia family estate litigation Uganda` also brings into question Justice Verma's position as a sitting judicial officer, adding a layer of complexity to the dispute. The circumstances surrounding the issuance of the Certificates of No Objection, as argued by the plaintiffs, raise serious questions about whether all relevant information and interests were properly considered before their issuance. The Principal Judge's decision to recall the case file underscores the potential for high-level judicial oversight in such contentious matters.

This case offers significant insights into the administration of estates in Uganda, particularly when allegations of impropriety arise and public officials are involved. The Principal Judge's intervention underscores the potential for high-level judicial scrutiny in estate disputes, particularly when allegations of irregularities involving public officials are made. Such actions by senior judicial officers can lead to a re-evaluation of established procedures and practices.

For legal practitioners advising on estate administration in Uganda, this `estate administration lawsuit` suggests an increased likelihood of scrutiny regarding beneficiary identification and the protocols for family meetings. The recall of a case file by a Principal Judge indicates that contentious matters, especially those involving judicial officers, may face delays or direct intervention from higher judicial authorities. This development could influence how future estate administration cases are handled, potentially leading to more rigorous checks and balances to ensure transparency and fairness for all beneficiaries.

This case underscores the potential for high-level judicial intervention in estate disputes, particularly where irregularities involving public officials are alleged. Lawyers advising on estate administration in Uganda should anticipate increased scrutiny of beneficiary identification and meeting protocols, and be prepared for potential delays or file recalls by senior judicial officers in contentious matters.

Source: Original reporting via Uganda Radio Network