Chaka v First National Bank (CCT/ 420 of 2019) [2021] LSHC 45 (25 February 2021)

Chaka v First National Bank (CCT/ 420 of 2019) [2021] LSHC 45 (25 February 2021)

Service of summons at the applicant's chosen domicilium citandi was proper and in accordance with the rules; therefore, rescission under Rule 45(a) is not available. However, the attachment and sale of immovable property was void for lack of proper notice to the applicant, and must be set aside.

Citation
[2021] LSHC 45
Parties
Applicant/defendant: Mahase Armstrong Chaka; 1st Respondent/plaintiff: First National Bank of Lesotho; 2nd Respondent: Deputy Sheriff – Mrs Ntoi
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
25 February 2021
Case Number
CCT/ 420 of 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Rescission of Judgment and Review of Attachment / Judgment After Hearing of Rescission and Review Application
Outcome
Application for rescission dismissed; attachment and notice of sale set aside; costs apportioned.
Legal Topics
Rescission of Judgment, Service of Summons, Attachment and Sale in Execution, Notice Requirements
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Banking Law Rescission of Judgment Service of Summons Attachment and Sale in Execution Notice Requirements

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahase Armstrong Chaka

Applicant/defendant

First National Bank of Lesotho

1st Respondent/plaintiff

Deputy Sheriff – Mrs Ntoi

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Rescission of Judgment and Review of Attachment / Judgment After Hearing of Rescission and Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of summons at chosen domicilium citandi was proper
  2. 2 Whether rescission under Rule 45(a) or Rule 27(6) is available
  3. 3 Whether attachment and sale of property was lawful without proper notice

Ratio Decidendi

Service of summons at the applicant's chosen domicilium citandi was proper and in accordance with the rules; therefore, rescission under Rule 45(a) is not available. However, the attachment and sale of immovable property was void for lack of proper notice to the applicant, and must be set aside.

Court Disposition

Application for rescission dismissed; attachment and notice of sale set aside; costs apportioned.

Orders

  • Prayer to rescind the Order granted on 18 May 2020 is dismissed.
  • Attachment of the applicant’s property is reviewed and set aside.