Maleka v Master of the High Court, Pretoria and Others (2020/46493) [2021] ZAGPPHC 235 (19 April 2021)
The court found that the appointment of the Second Respondent as executrix was not in accordance with the requirements of the Administration of Estates Act. The First Respondent failed to properly consider the objections raised by the applicant and did not follow the prescribed procedures. The evidence demonstrated...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] ZAGPPHC 235
- Parties
- Applicant: Maleka, Phogoti; Respondent: Master of the High Court, Pretoria; Respondent: Manyaka, Maria Hunadi; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria; Respondent: Ndlovu, Grace; Respondent: ABSA Bank Limited
- Court
- North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- 2020/46493
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Opposed Motion
- Outcome
- Application granted; appointment of Second Respondent as executrix reviewed and set aside; Second Respondent removed as executrix.
- Judges
- Nyathi AJ
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates Act, Removal of Executrix, Review of Administrative Action
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Maleka, Phogoti
Applicant
Master of the High Court, Pretoria
Respondent
Manyaka, Maria Hunadi
Respondent
Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria
Respondent
Ndlovu, Grace
Respondent
ABSA Bank Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Opposed Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appointment of the Second Respondent as executrix of the estate of the late Mapula Evah Manyaka should be reviewed and set aside.
- 2 Whether the Second Respondent should be removed as executrix in terms of section 54(1)(a) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the appointment of the Second Respondent as executrix was not in accordance with the requirements of the Administration of Estates Act. The First Respondent failed to properly consider the objections raised by the applicant and did not follow the prescribed procedures. The evidence demonstrated that the Second Respondent was not a fit and proper person to administer the estate, and her continued appointment would not serve the interests of justice or the beneficiaries. Accordingly, the court held that the appointment should be reviewed and set aside, and the Second Respondent should be removed as executrix.
Court Disposition
Application granted; appointment of Second Respondent as executrix reviewed and set aside; Second Respondent removed as executrix.
Orders
- The appointment of the Second Respondent as executrix of the estate late Mapula Evah Manyaka by the First Respondent is reviewed and set aside.
- The Second Respondent is removed as executrix of the estate of the deceased Mapula Evah Manyaka in terms of section 54(1)(a) of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA
CASE NO:2020/46493
REPORTABLE:NO
OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:NO
REVISED
Date: 19 April 2021
DATE OF HEARING: 4th MARCH 2021
In the matter between:
MALEKA, PHOGOTI
Applicant
and
MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT, PRETORIA First Respondent
MANYAKA, MARIA HUNADI Second Respondent
REGISTRAR OF DEEDS, PRETORIA Third Respondent
NDLOVU, GRACE Fourth Respondent
ABSA BANK LIMITED Fifth Respondent
JUDGMENT
NYATHI AJ:
[1]. This is an opposed application in which the applicant seeks an order against the respondents in the following terms:
(a) An order in terms whereof the appointment of the Second Respondent as an executrix of the estate late Mapula Evah Manyaka [ ID Number: […]] by the First Respondent is reviewed and set aside in terms of section 91 of the Administration of Estates Act 66 of 1965;
(b) An order in terms whereof the Second Respondent is removed as Executrix of the estate of the deceased Mapula Evah Manyaka [ID Number: […]] in terms of section 54 (1) (a) of the Administration of Estates Act;