The applicant was the defendant in case no. HC 3982/12 and the respondent was the plaintiff. Case no. HC 3982/12 is a summons or action matter in which the applicant was sued for various sums of money in damages allegedly caused by the applicant to the respondent’s property which he rented in terms of a lease agreement. In addition to damages, the applicant was also sued for outstanding rentals and bills, interest and costs on the higher scale of legal practitioner and client. The total sum claimed from the applicant was put at US$12 122.17. My own addition of the... More
The second applicant is the managing director of the first respondent. The first respondent is a duly incorporated company in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe.
The first respondent is also a duly incorporated company in terms of the Laws of Zimbabwe. More
The applicant has approached this court on a certificate of urgency seeking the following relief:-
“TERMS OF FINAL ORDER SOUGHT
That you show cause to this Honourable Court why a final order should not be made in the following terms:
1. The first and the second respondent(s) be and are hereby ordered to release the applicant’s files and records. More
The plaintiff issued summons claiming the following.
“(i) payment of the sum of US$119 300-00 being the remaining balance of the agreed purchase price for one x 20 Tonne Hyundai Excavator, sold and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant, at its specific instance and request.
(ii) Interest at the prescribed rate calculated from the date of delivery being 19th of June 2014 to the date of full payment.
(iii) Costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale.” More
The applicant was the first respondent’s tenant at number 5 Albion House, 74 Harare. She was evicted from the premises without being given 48 hours notice as provided by r 4A (1) of Order 26 of the Magistrate’s Court (Rules 1980). She seeks an order of this court reinstating her into the premises pending the hearing of her application for the condonation of her late noting of an appeal against the decision of the magistrate on the strength of which the first respondent evicted her from the property. More
