Lugakingira, J.: The appellant claimed a piece of land from the respondent. At the commencement of the proceeding in the Primary Court the appellant briefly stated the substance and basis of his I claim and the respondent briefly stated
A the substance of his defence. At that juncture the trial magistrate framed one issue, namely, to which of the parties the disputed land belonged. Then, and without more, he summed up the case to the assessors who gave opinions in favour of the appellant, and judgment was entered accordingly. B The respondent successfully appealed to the District Court, and the appellant brought this appeal.
I do not have to go into the merits of the appeal as I think the proceeding was a nullity. No evidence was adduced. It follows that there was no basis for the purported summing up, the assessors' opinions and the judgment. What there was were just pleadings, but pleadings are not evidence and C cannot be the basis of a decision except where they amount to admissions, which was not the case here. I am of the view that the irregularity went to the root of the entire proceeding for, in effect, there was no trial at all.
The proceeding is quashed in its entirety with liberty to the appellant to institute fresh proceedings D if so minded. The parties will bear their respective costs here and below.