Skosana and Another v Molate and Others (8693/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 698 (8 October 2015)

Skosana and Another v Molate and Others (8693/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 698 (8 October 2015)

The court found that the First Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence explaining how the alleged error in the title deed occurred. The documentary evidence did not support his version that the authorities mistakenly registered the First Respondent as co-owner due to her name appearing on the permit. The permit itself identified the First Applicant as head of the family and the First Respondent as a lodger, with no indication of marriage or entitlement to co-ownership. The court held that the First Applicant did not establish a factual basis for rectification and dismissed the application.

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 698
Parties
Applicant: Mpitori Paulus Skosana; Applicant: Sizani Linah Skosana; Respondent: Lethabo Joyce Molate; Respondent: City of Pretoria Metropolitan Municipality; Respondent: The Director General of the Department of Housing, Province of Gauteng; Respondent: The Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 October 2015
Case Number
8693/2013
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
De Klerk
Legal Topics
Rectification of Title Deed, Co Ownership Dispute, Permit Conversion, Error in Registration
Land and Property Civil Procedure Rectification of Title Deed Co Ownership Dispute Permit Conversion Error in Registration

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mpitori Paulus Skosana

Applicant

Sizani Linah Skosana

Applicant

Lethabo Joyce Molate

Respondent

City of Pretoria Metropolitan Municipality

Respondent

The Director General of the Department of Housing, Province of Gauteng

Respondent

The Registrar of Deeds, Pretoria

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the title deed should be rectified to remove the First Respondent as co-owner of the property.
  2. 2 Whether the First Respondent was erroneously registered as co-owner due to a mistake by the authorities.
  3. 3 Whether the First Applicant established a factual basis for rectification of the title deed.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the First Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence explaining how the alleged error in the title deed occurred. The documentary evidence did not support his version that the authorities mistakenly registered the First Respondent as co-owner due to her name appearing on the permit. The permit itself identified the First Applicant as head of the family and the First Respondent as a lodger, with no indication of marriage or entitlement to co-ownership. The court held that the First Applicant did not establish a factual basis for rectification and dismissed the application.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.