HB 048-18 SOUND ELECTRICAL PROPERTY (PVT) LTD versus HORNFRISKON INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD t/a MAICON RESOURCES

 SOUND ELECTRICAL PROPERTY (PVT) LTD

versus

HORNFRISKON INVESTMENTS (PVT) LTD

t/a MAICON RESOURCES

 

 

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

MATHONSI J

BULAWAYO 20 FEBRUARY 2018 AND 1 MARCH 2018

 

 

Opposed Application

 

 

N Mazibuko for the applicant

P Lamola for the respondent

 

 

            MATHONSI J:          The applicant sued the respondent, Phil Lamola and Priscilla Mangisi by summons action in HC 1958/17 for payment of sums of $10 353-79, $4 651,00, eviction from promises known as No 99 Jason Moyo Street, Bulawayo, interest and costs on a legal practitioner and client scale.  The respondent, acting on its own, entered appearance to defend and the applicant’s protestations by letter written by its legal practitioners on 31 August 2017 entreating the respondent to secure the services of a legal practitioner to file the appearance to defend on its behalf and to represent it before this court fell on deaf ears.  Instead the respondent proceeded, as if nothing had happened, to file a request for further particulars.

            It is that intransigence on the part of the respondent which has prompted the applicant to make this application for directions in terms of rule 151 of the High Court Rules, 1971 seeking an order directing the respondent to instruct a firm of legal practitioners to assume agency on its behalf and there after file process in HC 1958/17.  The applicant would like the respondent barred from filing further process in that matter unrepresented by a legal practitioner and that if it fails to comply leave be granted for the applicant to apply for default judgment.

            In its founding affidavit, deposed by Thembinkosi Mhlanga the Commercial Letting Manager of the applicant’s estate agent John Pocock and Company, the applicant stated that the appearance to defend is irregular in that the respondent cannot represent itself in a superior court 

Download File: 

Tags: