Mongale and Others v Shakung and Others (28224/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 583 (5 May 2022)

Mongale and Others v Shakung and Others (28224/2020) [2022] ZAGPJHC 583 (5 May 2022)

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the property, supported by the title deed and municipal clearance certificate. The purported sale agreement relied upon by the respondents does not comply with the Alienation of Land Act, as it lacks the applicant's signature and fails to meet statutory formalities. The respondents' occupation is therefore unlawful. The argument regarding non-joinder of Mr Mpho Shakung does not defeat the application, as the core issue is the validity of the sale and the applicant's ownership. The court weighed the documentary evidence and found the applicant's version more credible and supported by undisputed facts. Accordingly, the...

Citation
[2022] ZAGPJHC 583
Parties
Applicant: Pulane Ruth Mongale & Others; Respondent: Tsili Shakung & Others
Court
South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 May 2022
Case Number
28224/2020
Procedural Posture
Eviction Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; respondents to be evicted.
Judges
Victor
Legal Topics
Alienation of Land Act, Eviction, Unlawful Occupation, Compliance With Formalities
Land and Property Civil Procedure Alienation of Land Act Eviction Unlawful Occupation Compliance With Formalities

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

Parties

Pulane Ruth Mongale & Others

Applicant

Tsili Shakung & Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Eviction Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are unlawfully occupying the property owned by the applicant.
  2. 2 Whether the purported sale agreement complies with the Alienation of Land Act and transfers ownership.
  3. 3 Whether non-joinder of an interested party is fatal to the application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant is the registered owner of the property, supported by the title deed and municipal clearance certificate. The purported sale agreement relied upon by the respondents does not comply with the Alienation of Land Act, as it lacks the applicant's signature and fails to meet statutory formalities. The respondents' occupation is therefore unlawful. The argument regarding non-joinder of Mr Mpho Shakung does not defeat the application, as the core issue is the validity of the sale and the applicant's ownership. The court weighed the documentary evidence and found the applicant's version more credible and supported by undisputed facts. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Application granted; respondents to be evicted.

Orders

  • The first, second and third respondents must vacate the property by no later than 30 September 2022.
  • The respondents must pay the costs of opposition.