Naidoo and Another v Chetty and Others (6546/06) [2009] ZAKZPHC 84 (1 December 2009)

Naidoo and Another v Chetty and Others (6546/06) [2009] ZAKZPHC 84 (1 December 2009)

The court found that the applicants do not possess a real right to the property until the subdivision is registered and the interdicts are withdrawn. The existing interdicts are substantive and must be addressed before any transfer can occur. The applicants' rights are contractual and do not override the procedural requirements imposed by the Registrar of Deeds and the interests of other parties. The application for registration and removal of interdicts is therefore dismissed, and the applicants are ordered to pay costs.

Citation
[2009] ZAKZPHC 84
Parties
Applicant: Rubindren Naidoo; Applicant: Ragini Naidoo; Respondent: Sargan Velu Chetty; Respondent: Rhona Helen Chetty; Respondent: U.J Vather; Respondent: Subash Maikoo; Respondent: Mohammed Ashraf Cassim N.O.; Respondent: Dawood Mohammed; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds for The Province of KwaZulu-Natal; Respondent: Standard Bank of SA Ltd
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 December 2009
Case Number
6546/06
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Application for Registration of Property and Removal of Interdicts
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants.
Judges
Steyn
Legal Topics
Registration of Property, Removal of Interdicts, Real Rights Vs Personal Rights, Transfer of Land, Prejudice to Third Parties
Land and Property Civil Procedure Registration of Property Removal of Interdicts Real Rights Vs Personal Rights Transfer of Land Prejudice to Third Parties

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rubindren Naidoo

Applicant

Ragini Naidoo

Applicant

Sargan Velu Chetty

Respondent

Rhona Helen Chetty

Respondent

U.J Vather

Respondent

Subash Maikoo

Respondent

Mohammed Ashraf Cassim N.O.

Respondent

Dawood Mohammed

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds for The Province of KwaZulu-Natal

Respondent

Standard Bank of SA Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Application for Registration of Property and Removal of Interdicts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to registration of Portion 91 (of 5) of Erf 153 in their names despite existing interdicts.
  2. 2 Whether the interdicts registered against the property must be withdrawn before transfer can be effected.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants hold a real right or merely a contractual right to the property.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants do not possess a real right to the property until the subdivision is registered and the interdicts are withdrawn. The existing interdicts are substantive and must be addressed before any transfer can occur. The applicants' rights are contractual and do not override the procedural requirements imposed by the Registrar of Deeds and the interests of other parties. The application for registration and removal of interdicts is therefore dismissed, and the applicants are ordered to pay costs.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicants.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • Applicants to pay the costs of the application.