The court considered whether there was a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant, whether there was misrepresentation by the defendant and if there was breach of the contract and the remedies for the parties. The court held that there was a contract. That As to whether there was a misrepresentation by the defendant. A representation is a statement made by one party to the other before or at the time of contracting with regard which is one of the causes that induces the contract. That the evidence on record show that the defendant made a number of representations that he bed the properties to soil and the plaintiff thereby proceeded to make the purchases of the same, certificate of purchase was issued. All this turned out to be false because the suit premises apparently were registered in the name of Francis Lubwa Luyimbazi. The substratum of the said lend had gone after reentry on court orders. The defendant is therefore liable for this misrepresentation in damages to the plaintiff (Pw1). This issue is therefore in the affirmative.