Published: 18 hours ago

The High Court of Zimbabwe has dismissed an application to evict alleged occupiers from a farm in Chegutu, ruling that rights under an A2 land offer letter do not automatically transfer to a deceased person's estate.

In her judgment, Justice Sylvia Chirawu-Mugomba said the applicant, Edmund Tasiana Mutale, had failed to establish a clear legal right to the property following the death of the original beneficiary.

"The rights in the land remain ‘suspended' until the executor takes steps to engage the relevant minister," the judge said.

The case centred on Subdivision 62 of Railway 30, a farm allocated in 2005 to the late Stella Lilian Mauni Mutale under Zimbabwe's A2 resettlement programme. She passed away in September 2020.

Edmund Mutale, acting on behalf of the estate through a power of attorney, approached the court seeking the eviction of Patricia Nyikadzino and other respondents, whom he accused of illegally occupying the land since 2022.

He also sought a declaration that the estate retained rights to the farm and that beneficiaries were entitled to inherit it.

However, the respondents argued they were occupying the land through a separate arrangement linked to another individual who had also been allocated the same property.

Justice Chirawu-Mugomba said the key issue before the court was not eviction, but the legal status of A2 land after the death of an allottee.

The court ruled that such land remains State property and cannot be treated like private property within a deceased estate.

"What it means is that the land still belongs to the State and there should be a process via the relevant authority for transfer of that land to the rightful heir," she said.

The judge emphasised that the executor of the estate must seek approval from the Minister of Lands and Rural Development before any rights can be transferred or continued.

The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that the required process had been followed, particularly engagement with the relevant ministry after the death of the original landholder.

"The applicant has not pleaded that at the death of the deceased, the minister was approached and what took place," the judge noted.

As a result, the court ruled that no clear right had been established to justify eviction or an interdict.

"If the application is considered from the perspective of an interdict, no clear right has been established . . . and the matter ends there," she said.

The judge added that even a request for a declaratory order could not succeed, as the estate had not yet secured legal recognition of its rights through the proper channels.

No Costs Awarded

While the respondents raised preliminary objections, the court said these did not address the central legal issue. The application was ultimately dismissed, with no order as to costs.
- The Herald

You might also want to read this

• Mugabe son paid shooting victim R400k, court told
• Court dismisses Ibhetshu Likazulu bid to revive Constitutional case
• Court delays derail multi-billion cyber city project
• Fake certificate cases flood courts
• Harare taken to court over sewage crisis
• Court lifts asset freeze on businessman
• Supreme Court revives US$455k farm feud appeal
• Court stops demolition of Mbare college
• Nyokayemabhunu extradition case drags on
• Court orders Chengbao rivals to vacate C-Mine