Southern Spirit Properties 236 (Pty) Ltd and Others v Unlawful Occupiers Of Portion 21 of The Farm Flakfontein and Others (16207/18) [2018] ZAGPJHC 125 (11 May 2018)

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG LOCAL DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG

Case number: 16207/18

In the matter between:

SOUTHERN SPIRIT PROPERTIES 236 (PTY) LTD

1st APPLICANT

CREMORA CHEESE FACTORY CC

2nd APPLICANT

ANTONIO CREMORA

3rd APPLICANT

LUCELLE BERNADETTE MARY CREMORA

4th APPLICANT

And

UNLAWFUL OCCUPPIERS OF PORTION 21

OF THE FARM FLAKFONTEIN 1st RESPONDENT

UNLAWFUL OCCUPPIERS OF PORTION 23

2nd RESPONDENT

OF THE FARM FLAKFONTEIN

UNLAWFUL OCCUPPIERS OF PORTION 63

3rd RESPONDENT

UNLAWFUL OCCUPPIERS OF PORTION 64

4th RESPONDENT

CITY OF JOHANNESBURG

5th RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

Van der Linde, J:

[1] This is an application by the four applicants against the four groups of respondents for a temporary interdict evicting them from four tracts of land. The application is brought outside of normal court times and by way of urgency. The applicants also ask that the temporary interdict has immediate effect, pending the return date, being 10 September 2018.

[2] Four properties are involved. The first applicant says it owns portion 21 of the farm Vlakfontein 238, and that a cheese factory is operated on that land. The second applicants says that it owns portions 23 and 63 of the farm Vlakfontein, and the third and fourth respondents say that together they own portion 64 of the farm Vlakfontein. The second, third and fourth pieces of land are vacant. And no-one resides on them, whether in permanent or temporary structures.

[3] The application before me was preceded by service of the papers in accordance with an order of Judge Victor on 28 April 2018. The

respondents received service of the order and filed a notice of opposition and a short answering affidavit to oppose the relief

claimed.

[4] The applicants’ case is the following. On 20 April 2018 about 200 to 300 people simultaneously entered these four pieces of property without the applicants’ permission. They did so in a co-ordinated and planned fashion. They began measuring out plots and allocating the plots. The manager, Willem van Rensburg, confronted them. They told him that the third applicant, known as Anton, had given permission. The third applicant denies this.

[5] The Johannesburg Metro Police attended. They told the people that they had to leave the properties. Councillor Sylvia also attended. She also told the people that it was private land and that they had to leave. The people then left the properties.

[6] On the next day, 21 April 2018, and again Sunday 22 April 2018 and Monday 23 April 2018, the same events occurred. Every time the Metro Police spoke to them, they left; but when the Metro Police left, the people retuned.

[7] The applicants wrote to the MEC for Human Settlements for the Gauteng Province but received no assistance.

[8] The applicants bring the application for eviction under s.5 of the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of land Act 19 of 1998. Under that section an unlawful occupier may be evicted pending proceedings for a final order if there is a real danger of substantial injury to persons or property; and the hardship to the owner is greater than the hardship of the unlawful occupier if the order is not granted; and if there is no other effective remedy.

[9] The applicants explain that illegal electricity connections off the Eskom supply have taken place, and they say this is dangerous. They say the land concerned is veld, covered in dry grass, and is a potential fire hazard. They say there is no infrastructure at all – no water, no sanitation, and no provision for refuse removal. They say there is a dirt access road with no markings and no lights, which is used by large trucks and heavy vehicles. This is a potential danger to people who would live there in informal settlements. They say mining activities had in the past been conducted there and although there has been rehabilitation, there was still a risk of land subsidence.

[10] They point out that the unlawful occupiers were on the verge of setting up homes, and say that this means they must have had other homes, or at least places to stay, before they attempted to occupy the applicants’ land.

[11] They say that in terms of s.25 (1) of the Constitution, their property may not be taken away from them except in terms of the law.

[12] The respondents’ case as set out in their answering affidavit raised one point only. It was that the applicants are not the owners of the property. They did not deny any of the other allegations that the applicants made in their affidavits. Those allegations must therefore be accepted.

[13] At the hearing before me the respondents were unrepresented. An interpreter was arranged, and two gentlemen, Mr Khulu and Mr Ndabandaba, spoke for them. They said that they heard for the first time in court that the applicants had title deeds to prove their ownership. Copies of the title deeds were annexed to the replying affidavit of the applicants, and these were extracted and given to Messrs Khulu and Ndabandaba. They raised too that the land in question was vacant and unused, and a source of criminal conduct and thus danger to those living in the neighbouring suburbs.

[14] Having regard to the fact that the respondents were unaware of the fact that the applicants had title deeds to prove their ownership of the land, and in view of their concerns about safety, I stood the matter down until Friday 11 May 2018, to afford both sides an opportunity to consider these matters, and then to convey to the court their final positions on Friday.

[15] Two issues only seem to me to require further attention. The first is the applicants’ ownership of the land, this being the only defence that the respondents raised. The applicants have put up the title deeds, and these show undoubtedly that they are the owners of the land. There is no valid defence that they have permitted their land to be occupied by the respondents, and the suggestion that Willem told them that Anton had given them permission must be rejected.

[16] All that that leaves is the question of the safety of the neighbouring residents. It seems to me that three considerations weigh here. First, one does not know who exactly of the respondents are residents of the neighbouring suburbs. Second, the applicants have undertaken that they will draw the attention of the South African Police Services to the concern raised by Mr Khulu and Mr Ndabandaba.

[17] And third, the applicants have said in their papers that the third and fourth applicants have applied for a rezoning of portion 64 for housing and a shopping centre, and the City of Johannesburg has agreed. When this occurs, the property will be developed for the benefit of all.

[18] In these circumstances I make the following order:

(a) I issue a temporary order on the identical terms as the order I made on 8 May 2018, but with return date on 10 September 2018.

Van der Linde, J (isiZulu):

[19] Lesi isicelo esifakwe abammangali abane ,bemangalela amaqembu amane befuna isivimbelo senkantolo sesikhashana esibakhipha lamaqembu

kwiziqeshana ezine zomhlaba,Lesisicelo sifakwe ngemuva kwesikhathi esijwayelekile sesikhathi sokusebenza kweNkantolo,ngendlela yesicelo esiphuthumayo.Abammangali bafuna futhi isivimbelo sesikhashana ngokuphuthumayo,kusalindwe usuku lokubuyela eNkantolo mhla ziyishumi kuMandulo (September) 2018.

[20] Zine iziqeshana zomhlaba okukhulunywa ngazo,Ummangali wokuqala uthi ungumnikazi oyisiqeshana somhlaba 21 kwipulazi iVlakfontein ku namba 238,Nokuthi kunenkampani ekhiqiza okusashizi esebenzela kulowomhlaba.Ummangali wesibili uthi ungumnikazi weziqeshana U 23 no 63 kulelopulazi,Ummangali westhathu nowesine bathi ngokuhlanganyela bangabanikazi bomhlaba owu namba 64 kwipulazi iVlakfontein.Isiqeshana

somhlaba wesithathu nowesine awusetshenzisiwe.Akunazakhiwo ezakhiwe ngokugcwele noma ngokwesikhashana.

[21] Isicelo esiphambi kweNkantolo sindlalelwe ukunikezelwa kwamaphepha ngokomlayelo kaMahluleli U Victor mhla zingamashumi amabili nesishagalombili ku Mbasa 2018.Abammangalelwa bathola lesisinqumo senkantolo base befaka amaphepha okuphikisa ahambisana

nencwadi emfishane efungelwe, ukuphikisa isisombululo esifunwa abammangali.

[22] Icala labammangali limi kanje.Mhla zingamashumi amabili kuMbasa abantu ababalelwa kumakhulu amabili kuya kwamathathu bangena

belakanyana kuleziqeshana ezine zomhlaba ngaphandle kwemnvume yabammangali.Bakwenza lokhu ngendlela ehlanganisiwe nehlelekile.Baqala bakala babelana iziza ,Umphathi ongu uMnuz Willem Van Rensburg wabaqonda ngalesisenzo.Bamtshela ukuthi ummangali wesithathu owaziwa ngelika Anton ubanikeze imnvume.Ummangali wesithathu uyakuphika lokhu.

[23] Amaphoyisa ka Masipala wase Goli ayekhona atshela abantu ukuthi kwakufanele baphume baphele kulomhlaba.Ikhansela uSylvia naye owayekhona,watshela

abantu ukuthi umhlaba unobunikazi bangasese kufanele baphume baphele .Abantu baphuma kulomhlaba ngalelolanga.

[24] Ngosuku olulandelayo lwangomhla wamashumi amabili nanye nange Sonto lomhla wamashumi amabili nambili ku April 2018, nangoMsombuluko mhla zingamashumi amabili nantathu isigameko esifanayo saphinda senzeka,Ngasosonke lesisikhathi amaphoyisa kaMasipala ayekhuluma

nabo ahambe,mayehamba ,abantu babuyele kulomhlaba.

[25] Abammangali babhalela uNgqongqoshe weZokuhlaliswa kwaBantu kwisifundazwe iGauteng kodwa abatholanga usizo.

[26] Abammangali bafaka isicelo sokukhishwa kwabammangelelwa kulomhlaba ngaphansi kwesigaba sesihlanu somthetho Ovimbela Ukukhishwa

ngokungemthetho nokudliwa ngokungemthetho komhlaba weshumi sesishagalolunye wonyaka ka 1998.(Sec 5 of the Prevention of Illegal

Eviction and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 Of 1998) Ngaphansi kwalesisigaba somthetho ,Othathe ubunikazi bomhlaba ngokungemthetho

engakhishwa kusalindwe isinqumo esingujuqu uma kunobungozi bokulahlekelwa kubantu noma komhlaba ,nobunzima kumnikazi womhlaba bukhulu kunobunzima balowo odle umhlaba ngokungemthetho,uma isinqumo singakhishwa futhi uma kungekho isisombululo esisheshayo.

[27] Abammangali bayachaza ukuthi kunokuxhunywa kukagesi okungekho emthethweni nenkampani ephakela ugesi uEskom,futhi bathi lokhu kunobungozi,Bathi

Umhlaba okukhulunywa ngawo uyisiganga esimbozwe utshani obomile, okunamathuba okubanga umlilo.Bathi akunangqalasizinda kwanhlobo,

akunamanzi, ukunazinhlelo zokuthuthwa kwendle,akunazinhlelo zokuthuthwa kwemfucuza, Bathi kunomgwaqo,ongalungisiwe, ongenazimpawu

zomgwaqo ,ongakhanyi,osetshenziswa izithuthi ezinkulu.Lokhu okunobungozi kubantu abahlala ezakhiweni.Bathi imisebenzi yezokumbiwa

phansi ebiyenziwa ngesikhathi esidlule kuleyondawo ibange ukuthi yize kunemizamo yokuqinisa umhlaba eyenziwe kusenobungozi

bomhlaba ongazimelele.

[28] Babalula ukuthi abathathi bomhlaba ngokungemthetho basemalungiselelweni okusungula amakhaya, lokhu okuchaza ukuthi bebenawo amanye amakhaya noma okungenani indawo yokuhlala ngaphambi kokuzithathela lomhlaba wabammangali.

[29] Bathi ngokwesigaba samashumi amabili nanhlanu wesigatshana sokuqala somthethosisekelo, umhlaba wabo ungeke wathathwa kubo ngaphandle

kokulandela imigudu efanele yomthetho.

[30] Icala labammangelwa njengokuphendula kwabo kwincwadi efungelwe ,baphakamise iphuzu elilodwa kuphela eliwukuthi abammangali ababona abanikazi bomhlaba.Abaphiki neyodwa yezinsolo ezenziwa abammangali ezincwadini zabammangali ezifungelwe.Lezizinsolo zifanele

ukwamukelwa.

[31] Ngesikhathi sokuqulwa kwecala abammangalelwa bebengenaye ummeli,Kwenziwa imizamo yokuthola umhummushi wolimi lwesiZulu ,abesilisa ababibili abazazisa ngo Mnuz Khulu no Mnuz Ndabandaba bakhulumela umphakathi,Bathi bayaqala ngqa ukuzwa eNkantolo ukuthi abammangali

bangabanikazi bomhlaba banamatayitela agunyaza ubunikazi bomhlaba,Umfuziselo wamatayitela ayenanyekwe kwizincwadi zokuphendula

ezifungelwe zabammangali, yakhishwa yanikezwa uMnuz Khulu noMnuz Ndabandaba.Abaphakamisa ukuthi umhlaba okukhulunywa ngawo uyisiganga

,esingenamuntu esingasetshenziswa,esiyisizinda salo lonke uhlobo yobugengu nobungozi kulabo abakhelene naleyo ndawo.

[32] Emnva kokuzwa iqiniso lokuthi abammangalelwa bebengenalo ulwazi lokuthi abammangali banamatayitela afakazela ubunikazi bomhlaba nanokubheka ukuthi imizwa yabo ngezokuphepha ,Inkantolo yaguqisa loludaba kuze kube uLwesihlanu ziyishumi nanye kuMbasa 2018 ukunikeza womabili amacala ithuba lokucabangisisa loludaba nokwazisa inkantolo ngeziphakamiso zokugcina abanazo ngaloludaba.

[33] Kunezingqinamba ezimbili inkantolo ebona zifanele ukubhekisiswa.Eyokuqala eyobunikazi komhlaba kwabammangali,okuyisona sizathu sokuzivekela esaphakamiswa abammangalelwa.Abammangali babuvezile ubufakazi bobumnini mhlaba.Akunasizathu sokuzivikela esivumela abamangalelwa ukuthi badle umhlaba wabammangali,nombono wokuthi u Mnuz Willem wabatshela wabatshela ukuthi u Anton ubanikile imnvume sifanele ukulahlwa inkantolo.

[34] Konke lokhu kushiya umbuzo wendaba yezokuphepha kwabakhele lendawo .Inkantolo ibona sengathi kunezimnvo ezintathu okufanele zibhekwe

kuloludaba.Olukuqala akuqondakali kahle ukuthi kubammangalelwa yibaphi abangabahlali abakhelene nalendawo ,Olwesibili abammangali

bazinqumele ukuthi bazokwazisa Umbutho Wamaphoyisa AseMzansi ngezimnvo zokuphepha eziphakamiswe uMnuz Khulu no Mnuz Ndabandaba.

[35] Olwesithathu,Abammangali bathe emaphepheni abo aphambi kwenkantolo,Ummangali wesithathu nowesine afake isicelo sokudatshulwa komhlaba ukuze kwakhiwe izindlu nenxanxathela yezitolo ,Umkhandlu dolobha waseGoli ubanikile leyomnvume.Uma sekwenzeka lokhu lomhlaba uyothuthuka kuzuze wonke umuntu.

[36] Ngaphansi kwalezizimo inkantolo yenze lesisinqumo :Inkantolo ikhipha isinqumo sesikhashana esinemibandela efanayo nesinqumo esenziwe yinkantolo mhla ka 8 May 2018,kodwa usuku lokubuyela kuseyilo usuku lwango mhlaka 10 ku Septemba 2018

11 May 2018

WHG van der Linde

Judge, High Court

Johannesburg

For the Applicants:

Adv D Vetten

Instructed by

Mr M Martini

Applicants’ Attorney

For the respondents:

Unrepresented.