Mabitle v P.E.G (Pty) Ltd (LC/APN/36/2020) [2022] LSHC 78 (3 March 2022)

Mabitle v P.E.G (Pty) Ltd (LC/APN/36/2020) [2022] LSHC 78 (3 March 2022)

The court found that the present and prior actions are between the same parties or their successors, concern the same subject matter (plots 425 and 426), and are based on the same cause of action—fraudulent acquisition of title. The reliefs sought in both actions flow from the same main issue. Therefore, the plea of lis pendens is validly raised and the present proceedings must be stayed pending determination of the prior suit.

Citation
[2022] LSHC 78
Parties
Applicant: Pulane Mabitle; 1st Respondent: P. E. G. (Pty) Ltd Reg. No.197/243; 2nd Respondent: Food for Africa Reg. No.191/217; 3rd Respondent: Kolisang Mochesane Lepholisa; 4th Respondent: Stephan Carl Buys; 5th Respondent: Dupreez Liebetrau & Co.; 6th Respondent: All tenants/occupants on plot numbers 122281-425 and 12281-426; 7th Respondent: Land Administration Authority; 8th Respondent: Land Registrar; 9th Respondent: Registrar of Deeds; 10th Respondent: Maseru City Council; 11th Respondent: Master of the High Court; 12th Respondent: Commissioner of Police; 13th Respondent: Attorney General
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
3 March 2022
Case Number
LC/APN/36/2020
Procedural Posture
Ruling on Preliminary Objection / Preliminary Objection—lis Pendens
Outcome
Objection on lis pendens upheld; proceedings stayed pending determination of CIV/T/530/2011; applicant to pay costs of objection.
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Jurisdiction, Inheritance and Succession, Fraudulent Transfer of Land, Cancellation of Deeds of Transfer
Source Language
English
Civil Procedure Land Law Lis Pendens Jurisdiction Inheritance and Succession Fraudulent Transfer of Land Cancellation of Deeds of Transfer

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pulane Mabitle

Applicant

P. E. G. (Pty) Ltd Reg. No.197/243

1st Respondent

Food for Africa Reg. No.191/217

2nd Respondent

Kolisang Mochesane Lepholisa

3rd Respondent

Stephan Carl Buys

4th Respondent

Dupreez Liebetrau & Co.

5th Respondent

All tenants/occupants on plot numbers 122281-425 and 12281-426

6th Respondent

Land Administration Authority

7th Respondent

Land Registrar

8th Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

9th Respondent

Maseru City Council

10th Respondent

Master of the High Court

11th Respondent

Commissioner of Police

12th Respondent

Attorney General

13th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Ruling on Preliminary Objection / Preliminary Objection—lis Pendens

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plea of lis pendens is validly raised and bars the present proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Land Court has jurisdiction over the dispute involving alleged fraudulent transfer of land and inheritance issues

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the present and prior actions are between the same parties or their successors, concern the same subject matter (plots 425 and 426), and are based on the same cause of action—fraudulent acquisition of title. The reliefs sought in both actions flow from the same main issue. Therefore, the plea of lis pendens is validly raised and the present proceedings must be stayed pending determination of the prior suit.

Court Disposition

Objection on lis pendens upheld; proceedings stayed pending determination of CIV/T/530/2011; applicant to pay costs of objection.

Orders

  • The objection on lis pendens is upheld and these proceedings are stayed pending the determination of CIV/T/530/2011.
  • Applicant is ordered to pay costs of this objection.