1. The applicant seeks an order for confirmation of a provisional order granted on the following terms;
“TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause why a final order should not be made in the following terms
1. The 1st respondent’s Notice headed “licensing of Petroleum Sector Operators in 2020” date stamped 9 March 20202 be and is hereby declared null and void.
2. The 1st respondent’s board be and is hereby declared improperly constituted and thereby null and void.
3. 1st respondent shall pay the costs of suit.” More
Shumba owned a residential of property in South Africa. It was under mortgage. He failed to service his mortgage bond. The bank foreclosed on the mortgage bond. He was desperate to avoid the sale of his property by auction. He approached Jayesh Shah for a loan in order to save his property from imminent auction. They concluded an agreement in South Africa in terms of which Jayesh Shah remitted money to Shumba’s legal practitioners in South Africa. The property was not auctioned on the due date. Instead the legal practitioners passed a mortgage bond over the property in favour of... More
The dispute between the parties is concerned with a share certificate in the name of Gilbert Muponda of ENG. On 18th February 2004 this Honourable Court granted an order in favour of the applicant as against the said Muponda, one Nyasha Watyoka and ENG Asset Management (Pvt) Ltd. In terms of the order aforesaid Watyoka and Muponda were held personally liable for all debts and liabilities due by the asset management company to the applicant. This court also ordered that the personal properties of the two be sold in execution for the due payment of the amount of $499 782... More
This is a chamber application for leave to admit into evidence a supplementary opposing affidavit earlier filed without the leave of the court.
BACKGROUND
The background to this matter is that the respondent filed an application under HC 1130/11 to compel the applicant to transfer stand 13981 Khami Road Extension, Kelvin West, Bulawayo into its name on 3 February 2011.Following this the applicant in this application who is the respondent in HC 1130/11 filed its opposing papers followed by an answering affidavit from the first respondent. The applicant subsequently filed a supplementary opposing affidavit[hereinafter referred to as the supplementary or... More
: The applicant is an incorporation under provisional liquidation and is, through its provisional liquidator, seeking an interlocutory interdict preventing the second respondent from transferring, encumbering or dealing with stand 5205 Salisbury Township of Salisbury Township lands (“the property”). It also seeks an interlocutory interdict preventing the fourth respondent, a commercial bank, from releasing the purchase price of US$280 000-00 to anyone or registering any bond or other form of security on the title deed of the property and another interlocutory interdict against the third respondent, the Registrar of Deeds, from processing any transfer, mortgage bond or other security on... More
