Maboa and Another v Mukhari and Others (5446/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 499 (12 April 2018)

Maboa and Another v Mukhari and Others (5446/2017) [2018] ZAGPPHC 499 (12 April 2018)

The court found that the applicants are the registered owners of the property and have complied with all procedural requirements under the PIE Act, including proper service of the section 4(2) notice. The first respondent failed to provide credible evidence of ownership or a valid customary marriage, nor did she substantiate her claim of pending legal proceedings. The court considered the personal circumstances of the first respondent, noting her gainful employment and absence of minor children or elderly dependents residing at the property. Balancing the interests of the parties, the court concluded that eviction would be just and equitable, as the applicants have been prejudiced by...

Citation
[2018] ZAGPPHC 499
Parties
Applicant: Keneiloe Elsie Maboa; Applicant: Jonas Maboa; Respondent: Lebogang Grace Mukhari; Respondent: Unlawful Occupiers; Respondent: The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: The Sheriff of Pretoria South West
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
12 April 2018
Case Number
5446/2017
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Judgment
Outcome
Eviction granted; costs awarded against first and second respondents.
Judges
Shangisa
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Unlawful Occupation, Eviction Procedure, Just and Equitable Test
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Unlawful Occupation Eviction Procedure Just and Equitable Test

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keneiloe Elsie Maboa

Applicant

Jonas Maboa

Applicant

Lebogang Grace Mukhari

Respondent

Unlawful Occupiers

Respondent

The City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

The Sheriff of Pretoria South West

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants complied with the procedural requirements of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act (PIE Act).
  2. 2 Whether the applicants are the lawful owners of the property and entitled to seek eviction.
  3. 3 Whether the eviction of the first respondent is just and equitable under the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants are the registered owners of the property and have complied with all procedural requirements under the PIE Act, including proper service of the section 4(2) notice. The first respondent failed to provide credible evidence of ownership or a valid customary marriage, nor did she substantiate her claim of pending legal proceedings. The court considered the personal circumstances of the first respondent, noting her gainful employment and absence of minor children or elderly dependents residing at the property. Balancing the interests of the parties, the court concluded that eviction would be just and equitable, as the applicants have been prejudiced by...

Court Disposition

Eviction granted; costs awarded against first and second respondents.

Orders

  • The first and second respondents, and all persons occupying or claiming through them, are ordered to vacate the property within 45 days from the date of this order.
  • Should the first and second respondents or those claiming through them fail to vacate, the Sheriff of Pretoria South-West is authorized to execute the eviction and may obtain assistance from the South African Police Service.