Ramabodu and Another v Rex and Others (1907/2020) [2020] ZAFSHC 234 (1 October 2020)

Ramabodu and Another v Rex and Others (1907/2020) [2020] ZAFSHC 234 (1 October 2020)

The court found that the applicants had established ownership of the property and that the first respondent had breached the lease agreement by failing to pay rent and maintain the property. The defence of lis pendens was rejected, as the pending action for rental arrears and the eviction application were based on different causes of action and subject matter. The court was satisfied that all procedural requirements under the PIE Act were met and that it was just and equitable to grant the eviction order. The first respondent failed to raise any valid defence or demonstrate the presence of vulnerable persons on the property. The court exercised its discretion to determine a reasonable...

Citation
[2020] ZAFSHC 234
Parties
Applicant: Stephen Ramabodu; Applicant: Nthabiseng Ramabodu; Respondent: Charlton Michael Rex; Respondent: Any Other Unlawful Occupiers; Respondent: Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 October 2020
Case Number
1907/2020
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Eviction Application Under PIE Act; Opposed Motion
Outcome
Eviction order granted against the first and second respondents; costs awarded to the applicants.
Judges
M A Mathebula
Legal Topics
Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act, Eviction Proceedings, Lis Pendens, Lease Agreement Breach, Just and Equitable Eviction
Land and Property Civil Procedure Prevention of Illegal Eviction Act Eviction Proceedings Lis Pendens Lease Agreement Breach Just and Equitable Eviction

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

Parties

Stephen Ramabodu

Applicant

Nthabiseng Ramabodu

Applicant

Charlton Michael Rex

Respondent

Any Other Unlawful Occupiers

Respondent

Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Eviction Application Under PIE Act; Opposed Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants are entitled to an eviction order under the PIE Act.
  2. 2 Whether the defence of lis pendens raised by the first respondent is sustainable.
  3. 3 Whether it is just and equitable to grant the eviction order and determine the date of eviction.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicants had established ownership of the property and that the first respondent had breached the lease agreement by failing to pay rent and maintain the property. The defence of lis pendens was rejected, as the pending action for rental arrears and the eviction application were based on different causes of action and subject matter. The court was satisfied that all procedural requirements under the PIE Act were met and that it was just and equitable to grant the eviction order. The first respondent failed to raise any valid defence or demonstrate the presence of vulnerable persons on the property. The court exercised its discretion to determine a reasonable...

Court Disposition

Eviction order granted against the first and second respondents; costs awarded to the applicants.

Orders

  • The first respondent and all persons occupying with and through him are evicted from the property known as erf […], Bloemfontein, Extension 166, better known as […] W Street, Woodland Hills, Bloemfontein.
  • The first and second respondents must vacate the property on or before Wednesday, 30 October 2020 and not return thereafter.