Twala and Another v Kwababa and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 175; 60705/2021 (8 March 2023)

Twala and Another v Kwababa and Others [2023] ZAGPPHC 175; 60705/2021 (8 March 2023)

The court found that the property in question was owned by the municipality and, after the death of Stephen Khumalo, the rights to the property lapsed. The first respondent was subsequently granted a lease and later purchased the property from the municipality. The applicants, not being legally adopted by the deceased, have no rights to inherit or claim the property. The sale and transfer to the second respondent were lawful and valid. The applicants failed to establish any legal basis for their claim or relief sought.

Citation
[2023] ZAGPPHC 175
Parties
Applicant: Nomawushe Caroline Twala; Applicant: Maggy Nomthandzo Sibiya; Respondent: Nompotawana Winnie Kwababa; Respondent: Martina Zikode; Respondent: Gauteng Provincial Department of Human Settlement; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
8 March 2023
Case Number
60705/2021
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs.
Judges
Makhoba
Legal Topics
Municipal Housing Permits, Leasehold Conversion, Standing to Sue, Transfer of Property, Succession Rights
Land and Property Civil Procedure Municipal Housing Permits Leasehold Conversion Standing to Sue Transfer of Property Succession Rights

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nomawushe Caroline Twala

Applicant

Maggy Nomthandzo Sibiya

Applicant

Nompotawana Winnie Kwababa

Respondent

Martina Zikode

Respondent

Gauteng Provincial Department of Human Settlement

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sale and transfer of the property was entered into erroneously or fraudulently.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants have standing to challenge the sale and transfer of the property.
  3. 3 Whether the applicants have any rights to inherit or claim the property after the death of the stepfather.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the property in question was owned by the municipality and, after the death of Stephen Khumalo, the rights to the property lapsed. The first respondent was subsequently granted a lease and later purchased the property from the municipality. The applicants, not being legally adopted by the deceased, have no rights to inherit or claim the property. The sale and transfer to the second respondent were lawful and valid. The applicants failed to establish any legal basis for their claim or relief sought.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.