The High Court dismissed Letshego Bank’s land appeal, holding there was no proof the first respondent mortgaged his house and no error in the tribunal’s reasoning.
The appellant failed to prove the existence of an enforceable oral contract for the sale of land due to lack of witness testimony. Exhibit SMA-1 was not helpful as it lacked land description and involved different parties. The DLHT properly evaluated the evidence, was not required to visit the locus in quo, and gave reasons for differing from assessors' opinions. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
There is no legal requirement for the assessors' opinions to be reproduced in the judgment as long as they are given, read out in the presence of the parties, and considered by the Chairman. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed.
Failure by the DLHT chairman to require and record assessors' opinions before judgment, and to read them to the parties, is a fatal irregularity that nullifies the proceedings and judgment.
Source excerpt
Role of assessors in dlht
Compliance with land disputes courts act
Nullification of proceedings due to procedural irregularity