By KT Reporter
The High Court’s Family Division has revoked the letter of administration in relation to the estate of Teso’s late politician, Cuthbert Joseph Obwangor. The administrator of the estate, Rose Alupo, and Francis Aruo were faulted for concealing some of the properties of the deceased.
Lady Justice Immaculate Busingye Byaruhanga, in a ruling delivered on Thursday, revoked the letters of administration and ordered that a fresh letter of administration should be processed and granted to the rightful persons.
The Court found that Francis Aruo was not a biological child as earlier claimed while applying for the now revoked letter. The judge also ruled that Rose Alupo was not a lawful wife to the late Obwangor.
It, however, ruled that Veronica Kwapi and Margaret Atiang were the biological children and lineal descendants of Obwangor. Cuthbert Joseph Obwangor died intestate on May 15, 2012, and was buried at his ancestral home in Kiiya Village, Omasia Parish, Magoro Sub-county in Katakwi District.
He was a respected elder in Teso, and his properties, which are spread across Soroti, Katakwi, and Amuria, later became the center of a heated inheritance row. Shortly after his burial, the defendants, who are biological daughters of the late Obwangor and his legally wedded wife Anna Maria Abura, petitioned the High Court for letters of administration, which they secured in November 2012.
The suit was filed by Rose Alupo Obwangor and Francis Aruo seeking the revocation of the letters of administration, recognition as rightful beneficiaries, and reallocation of administrative authority over the estate.
The defendants, Margaret Itinot Angela, and Rosemary Atim opposed their claims. After years of hearings, witness testimonies, cross-examinations, site visits, and a compulsory DNA test ordered by the court.
The plaintiffs accused the defendants of concealing the existence of other beneficiaries, forging family meeting minutes, under-declaring the estate’s properties, misrepresenting the deceased’s marital status, and fraudulently installing themselves as heiresses without involving the wider family.
The plaintiffs further claimed that Rose Alupo Obwangor, the 1st plaintiff, had been customarily married to the late Obwangor in 1990 under Iteso customs, asserting that they had two daughters together, Veronica Kwapi and Margaret Atiang.
They claimed that Francis Aruo was a biological son of the deceased from an earlier customary union with the late Janet Amoit Alupo. The defendants denied the claim, insisting that their father had only one legally recognized wife, Anna Maria Abura, who died in 2003.
As tensions ran high, the court undertook a step-by-step analysis of each issue presented in the case.
The judge was to determine whether Rose Alupo was a Lawful Wife and Widow of the Late Obwangor? The court first examined whether the 1st plaintiff was legally married to the deceased through a customary marriage.
The plaintiffs alleged that dowry was paid and rites performed in accordance with Iteso traditions. However, Justice Byaruhanga dismissed this claim, relying on two key facts: a proven church marriage between Obwangor and Anna Maria Abura, solemnized in 1943 at St. Peter’s Nsambya, was still valid in 1990 when the alleged customary marriage with Alupo Rose took place; and that the Customary Marriage (Registration) Act, particularly Section 11(e), makes it illegal to contract a customary marriage while still bound by a monogamous civil or church marriage.
Because the deceased’s church marriage subsisted until the death of his legal wife in 2003, the court ruled that any subsequent customary marriage was void and initio.
The court ruled Rose Alupo’s purported customary marriage is void, and she was not a legal wife or widow of the late Cuthbert Joseph Obwangor. This ruling thus eliminates Rose Alupo from claiming spousal inheritance rights. The judge inquired whether the Defendants Lawful Administrators of the Estate?
Quoting sections 230(1) and 230(2) of the Succession Act, the court examined whether there was “just cause” to revoke the defendants’ letters of administration.
The plaintiffs argued that the defendants concealed the existence of other potential beneficiaries, under-declared the estate by listing only six out of ten properties, and misrepresented facts at the Administrator General’s office.
The defendants maintained that they acted with full family consent, followed due procedure, and that the plaintiffs were not recognized beneficiaries.
During its December 2024 locus visit, the court confirmed the full list of properties. Evidence showed that the defendants were aware of all properties but only listed some.
Justice Byaruhanga concluded that there had indeed been concealment and misrepresentation, especially regarding beneficiaries and the extent of the estate. The ruling implies that the defendants did not lawfully obtain the letters of administration.
The court had been asked to determine whether Francis Aruo, Veronica Kwapi, and Margaret Atiang were biological descendants of the late Obwangor.
Evidence presented by the plaintiffs included National Identification and Registration Authority (NIRA) birth certificates listing Obwangor as the father, baptism cards for the two daughters, and testimonies from relatives. The defendants argued that only a DNA test could prove paternity, leading to a court-ordered DNA test.
The results indicated that Veronica Kwapi and Margaret Atiang were the biological daughters of the deceased, while Francis Aruo was not. Justice Byaruhanga weighed the significance of DNA evidence alongside documentary evidence such as birth certificates and photographs.
The court found that Francis Aruo was not a biological child of the deceased. This ruling significantly alters the composition of the rightful beneficiaries.
The court was also to determine whether the plaintiffs and their children were beneficiaries of the estate.
While Rose Alupo was declared not legally married to Obwangor and thus not a beneficiary under spousal rights, the court ruled that her daughters are entitled to inherit as children of the deceased. The 2nd plaintiff, having been excluded by the DNA results, has no legal claim.
The estate’s beneficiaries now include Kwapi and Margaret Atiang.
The order for a full and accurate inventory of all ten properties, permanent injunctions preventing mismanagement of estate property, and redistribution of estate rights among legitimate beneficiaries only.
The court’s ruling will ensure that the estate will be managed transparently and in line with both statutory succession principles and verifiable family lineage.
This judgment brings an end to over ten years of legal battles marked by emotional testimonies, claims of exclusion, family factionalism, scientific examinations, and the complexities of interpreting both customary and statutory legal frameworks.
-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
