(2) The Applicant in this Application was
to be answerable in matters of Administration of the estate of Kategaya merely because she was the administrator of the estate of John Turyagyenda.
In my view these are two separate estates Th„
p e estates. The moment the
Administrator of the estate of Kategaya died the estate remained
without an administrator. The Letters of Administration, if they
existed, which has no, heen proved would a hate and „ was the
uty of the beneficaries to apply ,0 administer the residue of the
estate. Therefore any Judgment against the Applicant based on
« e Administration of Kategaya’s estate is invalid. I, follows that
a execution proceedings against the Applicant in the basis of
such judgment would equally be illegal because the Applicant was not administrator of the estate of Kategaya.
Miscellaneous Application number 7 of 1997 which in form is an ordinary suit was irregularly handled. This was a suit that required filing 0f a written statement of Defence and calling of evidence by either party. These defective proceedings, if had been properly handled, would have taken care of what Bikangiso and company Advocates seek to be considered as evidence in their submissions. I have perused the trial record there is no evidence properly brought before court to prove that the applicant sold any part of Kategayas estate. I did not find this a