Akanmbi v Magistrate MG Mavusi NO and others

• Jurisdiction: http://justis.com/jurisdiction/166,South Africa
• Judge: Langa J
• Judgment Date: 19 January 2023
• Citation: 2023 JDR 0252 (MN)
• Docket Number: 1347/2022
• Hearing Date: 19 January 2023

Langa J:

[1]

This is an application for the reviewing and setting aside of the judgment and order granted by the First Respondent, Magistrate MG Mavuso, of KwaMhlanga Magistrates Court. In the judgment the Magistrate, after having upheld a plea of non-joinder raised by the applicant, still ordered the trial to proceed. The Magistrate further referred the matter between the applicant and the Third Respondent to oral evidence after having made a finding that there was a dispute of fact. The applicant

2023 JDR 0252 p2

Langa J

contends that these decisions are irregularities which impair the legal validity of the proceedings or trial.

[2]

The facts in brief are that in February 2000 the Applicant leased from the Third Respondent a property situated at 003B Phola Park, Farm Enkeldooring, 209 JR. KwaMhlanga, measuring 30x30. The Applicant leased this property for the purpose of running his medical practice therefrom. The Applicant contended that when the lease agreement lapsed in 2001, he successfully negotiated the sale of the said property with the Third Respondent and ultimately bought the property from the Third Respondent for the agreed amount of R60 0000.00. It was further agreed that the title deed in respect of the property would be secured by the Third Respondent and transferred to the Applicant immediately.

[3]

It is common cause that the Applicant made some improvements on the said property and continued practicing therefrom for a substantial period. The Applicant stated that after struggling to get hold of the Third Respondent for the purposes of finalizing the transfer of the title deed as agreed, he started making inquiries about the property and the land on which it is situated. He discovered that the property belonged to the local Traditional Authority. When he contacted the Local Traditional Authority he was informed that he needed to obtain permission from the Traditional Authority in order to continue occupying the land. After negotiations the Local Traditional Authority granted him the Permission to Occupy the property.

[4]

However, in 2018 he was approached by J Mabena Attorneys acting on behalf of the Third Respondent who informed him that the Third Respondent is the owner of the property and that the Applicant and the Third Respondent had entered into a verbal agreement in terms of which the Applicant would make improvements on the property and

2023 JDR 0252 p3

Langa J

use it for a period of ten years rent free in order to recover the...