The North West High Court in Mahikeng has set aside the sale of a divorced couple’s house by the ex-wife for a meagre R1,000.
Makgothu Rudolph Mosothoane brought an application before the North West High Court. He was asking that the court set aside the sale of execution of the divorced couple’s house that took place on October 5, 2023.
Makgothu also asked that the first respondent in the matter, his ex-wife Moela Flora Mosothoane, be interdicted and prohibited from taking transfer of the property into her name.
Makgothu also asked the court that legal costs be granted in his favour in the event Moela challenged his application. Moela opposed his application. Despite her opposition, the court ruled in favour of Makgothu.
The divorced couple’s house is based in Riviera Park in Mahikeng. Judgment was handed down electronically by judge Ronald Deon Hendricks on Tuesday.
Marriage dissolved in 2022
The matter was heard last week Thursday. According to evidence presented in court, Makgothu and Moela married in community of property. The marriage was dissolved on July 20, 2022.
“Insofar as the joint assets are concerned, a settlement agreement was entered into. Which was made an order of court. ‘In terms of the settlement agreement, the immovable property known as Erf 3[…] C[…] Street, Riviera Park North, Mahikeng (‘the property’) was to be sold to the highest bidder. And the proceeds of same to be divided equally between the parties. The defendant (applicant) may buy the plaintiff’s (first respondents) portion of the house on an agreed amount’.
“The applicant obtained a municipal valuation of the property, which was valued at R1, 545 000.00. The applicant sourced buyers for the property.
“A firm of attorneys who are also doing conveyancing, was approached to assist with the sale. And also with transfer of the property. The applicant advised the first respondent that he had secured buyers for the property.
“Her reaction was that she is not interested in selling the property,” read a part of the court judgment. The evidence in court shows that on March 30, 2023 a writ of attachment of the immovable property was served on Makgothu.
House auctioned at the sheriff’s office
During July 2023, documents of the conditions of sale in execution of the property were found by Makgothu. They were lying in the front yard of the premises. The sale in execution (auction) was to be held on October 5, 2023.
“On this day, the applicant took leave of absence from work in anticipation of the auction. He had thought it would be held at the property, but to no avail. On the same day, he attended at the Office of the Sheriff to make enquiries.
“He was informed that the auction was held at the Sheriff’s office. And that the property was sold for R1,000.00 (one thousand rands). It was sold… to the highest bidder of the two that attended the auction.
Sold to the highest bidder for R1,000
“The property was sold to the attorney of record of the first respondent. [He was] acting in terms of a power of attorney on behalf of the first respondent. This for the meagre amount of R1 000.00 (one thousand rands). Much to the dismay of the applicant,” read the court judgment.
Moela opposed Makgothu’s application. He was mainly arguing that the sale in execution (auction) of the property was properly and lawfully done. And that there is no basis in law upon which the relief sought can be granted. Hendricks said the sale of the divorced couple’s house was unfair to the applicant.
Sale was unfair towards the applicant
“The first respondent who set the process of sale in execution (auction) in motion, is the same person that through a power of attorney empowered her attorney of record to bid on the auction for the sale of the immovable property. And who, lo and behold, bought it for a meagre amount of only R1,000.00 (one thousand rands).
“This, in my respectful view, is unfair towards the applicant,” said Hendricks.
In his judgement, Hendricks set aside the sale in execution of the divorced couple’s house held on October 5, 2023.
Hendricks also ordered that Moela be prohibited from taking transfer of the immovable property. The court also ordered Moela to pay legal fees.
