Jasat v Jazzbhai and Others (9788/10) [2012] ZAKZPHC 4 (6 February 2012)

Jasat v Jazzbhai and Others (9788/10) [2012] ZAKZPHC 4 (6 February 2012)

The court finds that there are material disputes of fact regarding the timing and possession of the Will, specifically whether the first respondent had the Will prior to July 2010 and whether it was faxed to the Municipality before Attorney Farouk Jasat allegedly found it. These disputes cannot be resolved on the papers and require oral evidence. The application is therefore adjourned for the hearing of oral evidence on these issues, with directions given for the conduct of such evidence and discovery.

Citation
[2012] ZAKZPHC 4
Parties
Applicant: I E Jasat; Respondent: Mrs A Jazzbhai; Respondent: Mrs F Kajee; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 February 2012
Case Number
9788/10
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Review and Interim Relief; Adjourned for Oral Evidence
Outcome
Application adjourned for oral evidence; no final relief granted at this stage.
Judges
Balton
Legal Topics
Administration of Estates Act, Executor Removal, Will Authenticity, Oral Evidence, Discovery Procedure
Civil Procedure Land and Property Administration of Estates Act Executor Removal Will Authenticity Oral Evidence Discovery Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

I E Jasat

Applicant

Mrs A Jazzbhai

Respondent

Mrs F Kajee

Respondent

Master of the High Court, Pietermaritzburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Review and Interim Relief; Adjourned for Oral Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision of the Master to remove the applicant as executor should be set aside.
  2. 2 Whether the first and second respondents were properly appointed as executors under the Will.
  3. 3 Whether the Will was in possession of the first respondent prior to July 2010.

Ratio Decidendi

The court finds that there are material disputes of fact regarding the timing and possession of the Will, specifically whether the first respondent had the Will prior to July 2010 and whether it was faxed to the Municipality before Attorney Farouk Jasat allegedly found it. These disputes cannot be resolved on the papers and require oral evidence. The application is therefore adjourned for the hearing of oral evidence on these issues, with directions given for the conduct of such evidence and discovery.

Court Disposition

Application adjourned for oral evidence; no final relief granted at this stage.

Orders

  • This application is adjourned to a date to be arranged with the Registrar for the hearing of oral evidence on the issues of when the Will was faxed to the Municipality and who corresponded with the Municipality on behalf of the estate.
  • The evidence shall be that of any witnesses whom the parties or either of them may elect to call, subject to the provisions set out in the judgment.