A dramatic attempt by a Mpumalanga couple to stop the court-sanctioned sale of their sprawling White River estate — once a wedding and conference venue — was struck off the urgent roll on Wednesday after a scathing ruling by the Mbombela High Court.
Acting Judge JL Bhengu dismissed the urgent application brought by Derrick Thabo Modjela and his wife, Pertunia Pheeha. They are trustees of the Morneo Family Trust, whose property is under a restraint order linked to ongoing criminal proceedings under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (POCA).
Nabbed on multiple charges
Modjela is a contracts manager at Johannesburg Water. Pheeha previously served as director of water services and chaired the Bid Evaluation Committee at Bushbuckridge Local Municipality.
In 2022, she was arrested alongside Admission Amukelani Phoku and Sibusiso Shadrack Dube. They were nabbed on multiple charges of corruption, money laundering, fraud, and theft. The Asset Forfeiture Unit obtained a restraint order valued at R30.6-million on September 19, 2022. The criminal trial is ongoing, with a confiscation enquiry to follow if the accused are convicted.
Their last-minute court bid came after they spotted a “sale by tender” sign outside their prized Portion 121 of the Farm 64 White River property on May 16, 2025.
They argued the move was an “ambush” by the court-appointed curator bonis, Johan Francois Engelbrecht. The couple claimed he had failed to respond to their legal queries.
Failed to satisfy the court
But Judge Bhengu was not swayed.
“The applicants failed to satisfy the court that they will not get substantial redress at a hearing in due course,” Bhengu ruled.
“Their failure to cooperate with the curator and their failure to comply with their disclosure obligations… bar them from approaching urgent court for assistance.”
The saga began on September 23, 2022, when the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) secured a provisional restraint order over the couple’s joint estate.
A final order followed unopposed on December 5, 2022. This gave Engelbrecht powers to manage and, if necessary, sell their assets under POCA.
Court papers reveal a long paper trail. On April 19, 2024, Engelbrecht notified the couple of his intent to sell the estate. The sale was due to mounting municipal arrears and lack of liquid funds.
Snubbed meeting invitations
Subsequent correspondence in October and November 2024 invited engagement. These included virtual meetings, which were largely ignored by the applicants.
Instead, the couple waited until May 27, 2025, to launch their urgent interdict. This was less than two weeks before the tender deadline of May 30, 2025.
Bhengu condemned this delay.
“The urgency relied upon by the applicants was self-created,” he said.
“They ignored the notice and brought the urgent application less than two weeks before the close of public tender.”
The applicants argued the estate was a generational asset. They claimed it could earn R500,000 through leasing, and that there were enough movable assets to cover debts.
However, they withheld full financial disclosures as required by law, citing legal privilege.
Financial disclosures
Bhengu found this defiant.
“The applicants as trustees of the Family Trust have a fiduciary duty to act with honesty and good faith… Their omission and/or misrepresentation of material facts… should be taken into account in determining whether they are entitled to an urgent relief.”
He rejected their claim that the property would be irreversibly lost if sold.
“This is… a mistaken belief,” he said, pointing out the tender process includes a 21-day review period.
The judge also noted that Engelbrecht had fulfilled his duties.
“I’m of the view that the curator discharged his duty to consult the owners of the property,” Bhengu ruled.
Couple to pay costs
“The curator also reported that he had not found any liquid assets in the estate to cover the mounting expenses.”
While a request for punitive costs against the applicants’ lawyer was dismissed, the couple themselves were not spared.
“The applicants are ordered to pay the respondents’ costs on an attorney and client scale,” Bhengu declared. He cited “misleading statements made under oath and unexplained omission of material facts.”
The criminal trial linked to the POCA order is expected to begin within two months. For now, the estate stands on auction’s edge — its fate sealed not by the hands of justice delayed, but by compliance denied.
