Hlongwane and Another v Masalesa and Others (22815/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 468 (24 August 2020)

Hlongwane and Another v Masalesa and Others (22815/2020) [2020] ZAGPPHC 468 (24 August 2020)

The court found that the first respondent's rights to the property were extinguished by the divorce decree and the subsequent Liquidation and Distribution Account, which recorded her compensation for her share. The failure to remove her name from the title deed was a mere formality and did not revive any rights. The Liquidator's account was issued in execution of a court order and is binding. The first respondent's counter-application to declare the account void was dismissed due to lack of substantive grounds and non-joinder of the Liquidator. The applicants were entitled to compel the respondents to sign transfer documents, and the fifth respondent was authorised to sign on their behalf...

Citation
[2020] ZAGPPHC 468
Parties
Applicant: Joseph Bongani Hlongwane; Applicant: Kgotlello Disemelo; Respondent: Tintswalo Mercy Masalesa; Respondent: Madumetja Johannes Masalesa; Respondent: The Master of the High Court, Pretoria; Respondent: The Register of Deeds; Respondent: Sheriff of the High Court, Wonderboom
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 August 2020
Case Number
22815/2020
Procedural Posture
Opposed Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; counter-application dismissed.
Judges
S Baqwa
Legal Topics
Transfer of Immovable Property, Liquidation and Distribution Account, Co Ownership Dispute, Execution of Court Order
Land and Property Civil Procedure Transfer of Immovable Property Liquidation and Distribution Account Co Ownership Dispute Execution of Court Order

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Bongani Hlongwane

Applicant

Kgotlello Disemelo

Applicant

Tintswalo Mercy Masalesa

Respondent

Madumetja Johannes Masalesa

Respondent

The Master of the High Court, Pretoria

Respondent

The Register of Deeds

Respondent

Sheriff of the High Court, Wonderboom

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Opposed Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first and second respondents are obliged to sign transfer documents for the sale of Erf 3925 Doornpoort Extension 34 Township.
  2. 2 Whether the first respondent retains any rights of co-ownership in the property following the divorce and Liquidation and Distribution Account.
  3. 3 Whether the Liquidation and Distribution Account is valid and binding on the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the first respondent's rights to the property were extinguished by the divorce decree and the subsequent Liquidation and Distribution Account, which recorded her compensation for her share. The failure to remove her name from the title deed was a mere formality and did not revive any rights. The Liquidator's account was issued in execution of a court order and is binding. The first respondent's counter-application to declare the account void was dismissed due to lack of substantive grounds and non-joinder of the Liquidator. The applicants were entitled to compel the respondents to sign transfer documents, and the fifth respondent was authorised to sign on their behalf...

Court Disposition

Application granted; counter-application dismissed.

Orders

  • First and second respondents are compelled and ordered to sign the transfer documents for Erf 3925 Doornpoort Extension 34 Township in favour of the buyer within 10 days from the date of this order.
  • The fifth respondent is authorised to sign all transfer documents on behalf of the first and second respondents if they fail to do so.