Justice Suzan Abinyo of the Commercial Division of the High Court has directed controversial Yassah Motors proprietor Yassah Seguya Matovu to refund Shs300m after he was defeated by tycoon Mutaasa Kafeero in the Shs900m car deal.
Kafeero through his lawyers led by Brian Mukisa of Muwema & Co. Advocates and Solicitors rushed to Court seeking a declaration to force Matovu to refund his money after failing to deliver to him a car they had agreed to sell to him in 2024.
According to Court documents, Kafeero entered an agreement with Matovu in February 2024 to sell to him a motor vehicle, Range Rover Model 2023 Grey in Color at a price of Shs900m.
Out of the agreeable price, Matovu paid Shs300m and was supposed to pay the balance in 12 equal monthly instalments of Shs50m.
More Read
However he was shocked to receive the motor vehicle which he did not pay for.
Instead of supplying him a Range Rover model 2023, he was supplied with Range Rover Model 2022 which he rejected and even stopped making the monthly instalment payments as they had agreed.
The parties entered a written mutual understanding on 1st April 2024 where they agreed that Matovu should refund the money paid or source for a model 2023.
On 29th April, 2024 he refunded only Shs50m and refused to refund the Shs300m claiming that the said amount was non-refundable under the terms of the sale and purchase agreement signed by parties.
Matovu further claim that he cannot refund the money on grounds that he sold the car to Kafeero on an agreement without any agreement as to the year of the manufacturer (model)
However, the presiding judge noted that court established that Kafeero refused to sign the agreement which Matovu first brought to him when entering the deal on grounds that the said agreement did not have a sales agreement with a model of the motor vehicle, and later returned with another sale agreement indicating the model as of 2023, which they both signed according to the evidence on court record.
“It is my considered view that when the defendant supplied a model 2022 Range which the Plaintiff rejected outrightly, and subsequently, on 1st April 2024, a mutual agreement was entered between the parties by which the Defendant agreed to source for a model 2023 Range Rover or refund the money that had been paid to him, it implies that motor vehicle Registration No. UBQ 436E, which was supplied by the Defendant to the Plaintiff, did not correspond with the description in the sale and purchase agreement of 1st 20 February 2024,” the judge stated.
Accordingly, the judge found that Matovu failed to fulfil his obligation in the mutual agreement, in which Kafeero had opted to treat the contract as repudiated, and is entitled to be discharged from the performance of his obligations under the contract.
He ordered him to refund the Shs300m and pay the costs of the case.
