Zamisa v Kali and Others (15249/2009) [2011] ZAKZDHC 10 (17 February 2011)

Zamisa v Kali and Others (15249/2009) [2011] ZAKZDHC 10 (17 February 2011)

The court found that the applicant's purported agreement of sale was invalid as the purchase price of R45,000.00 was never included in the written agreement, rendering it void under the Alienation of Land Act. The earliest date a valid agreement could have been concluded was 2 April 2008, but by then the first respondent had already entered into a valid and binding agreement with the third respondent on 13 November 2007 and had signed consent to transfer the property to the third respondent. The transfer to the third respondent was completed on 8 May 2009, making the sale perfecta and not open to challenge. The applicant's claim was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2011] ZAKZDHC 10
Parties
Applicant: Thokozile Princess Zamisa; Respondent: Donald Bonar Malizo Kali; Respondent: Danana Sarah Zamisa; Respondent: Sandile Masondo; Respondent: Registrar of Deeds, Kwazulu-Natal
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 February 2011
Case Number
15249/2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant in favour of the second and third respondents.
Judges
K. Swain
Legal Topics
Alienation of Land Act, Validity of Sale Agreement, Transfer of Property, Executor Duties
Land and Property Civil Procedure Alienation of Land Act Validity of Sale Agreement Transfer of Property Executor Duties

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

Parties

Thokozile Princess Zamisa

Applicant

Donald Bonar Malizo Kali

Respondent

Danana Sarah Zamisa

Respondent

Sandile Masondo

Respondent

Registrar of Deeds, Kwazulu-Natal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sale agreement between the applicant and the first respondent was valid and enforceable.
  2. 2 Whether the transfer of the property to the third respondent should be set aside.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to have the property transferred into her name.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's purported agreement of sale was invalid as the purchase price of R45,000.00 was never included in the written agreement, rendering it void under the Alienation of Land Act. The earliest date a valid agreement could have been concluded was 2 April 2008, but by then the first respondent had already entered into a valid and binding agreement with the third respondent on 13 November 2007 and had signed consent to transfer the property to the third respondent. The transfer to the third respondent was completed on 8 May 2009, making the sale perfecta and not open to challenge. The applicant's claim was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs awarded against the applicant in favour of the second and third respondents.

Orders

  • The application is dismissed.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of the second and third respondents.