High Court defuses $2m land row JSC, in a statement, said the filing of court cases, pleadings, processes, and documents in the general division of the High Court will be done electronically through the IECMS platform with effect from September 1, 2023.

Daniel Nemukuyu : Senior Court Reporter

A BID by a Harare businessman, Mr Bernard Mutanga, to take over 140 hectares of prime land belonging to Bellepaise Estate has hit a snag after the High Court nullified two contracts signed by the parties a decade ago. The property situated in Hatfield is valued at $2,2 million. Mr Mutanga, through his company Mai-Kai Real Estate Development Trust, signed a contract for the purchase of 10 000 shares in Bellepaise as well as an investment agreement in 2006.Mai-Kai-Real Estate took possession of the title deeds to the only property registered under Bellepaise, Number 4039/92 for Lot 9 Block S, Hatfield Estate, pending finalisation of the deal.

However, Mai-Kai failed to pay for the shares and breached several other terms of the agreements.

Bellepaise claimed back the title deed but Mai-Kai resisted resulting in the dispute spilling into the High Court.

Bellepaise filed a High Court application for the return of the title deed but Mai-Kai vehemently opposed it.

Justice David Mangota recently granted the application and nullified the transactions that were faciliated by the flawed contracts.

It was the court’s finding that Mai-Kai did not pay for the shares as agreed.

“They (respondents), however, produced no evidence of payment for the shares. The respondents’ submission which was to the effect that either payment was made or was waived could not hold.

“If they paid for the shares, as they claimed, they would have produced a receipt, or a copy of the bank transfer or an invoice or an acknowledgment of receipt from a person who received payment as proof of what they claimed to have done.

“The court, therefore, remained satisfied that no contract came into existence as between the parties,” ruled Justice Mangota.

The court also found that in terms of the contracts in question, Mai-Kai did not play its role of ensuring the eviction of illegal settlers from the 140ha piece of land.

“The respondents could not and did not advance any reason why they did not pursue the route of the courts from January 2006 to date alongside whatever effort they were making, if they were to resolve the same through the political arena,” the court ruled.

On January 5 2006, Mai-Kai entered into an agreement in which it was to purchase $10 000 shares in Bellepaise.

Bellepaise had only one property registered in its name, being the 140ha piece of land at the centre of the dis- pute.

If Mai-Kai had paid the full price within the stipulated timeframes and complied with the other terms and conditions, it would taken over ownership of the prime land.

A dispute also arose during the trial on whether the charged fee was in Zimbabwean dollars or American dol- lars.

In terms of the US dollar currency, the piece of land is now valued at $2,2 mil- lion.

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey