CBZ Bank has approached the High Court demanding over $23 000 from the estate of the late nationalist, Edgar Tekere.
BY CHARLES LAITON
The matter was heard before High Court judge Justice Felistus Chatukuta in chambers yesterday following summons issued by the bank, citing the estate’s executor, Ibbo Mandaza and the Master of the High Court as defendants.
In the court papers, CBZ said it was seeking payment of $23 180,24 plus 28% per annum interest and an order declaring Tekere’s Mutare immovable property, stand number 2638 measuring 2 741 square metres, executable.
In the declaration, the bank said the late Tekere was its customer operating account number 013-20260180026 at its Mutare branch.
The bank said on December 11, 2009, Tekere was granted a $14 000 loan for the stand and some of the express or implied terms for the facility were that the amount to be withdrawn by Tekere was not to exceed the aggregate sum of the borrowed amount.
“An aggregate sum of $22 450 was withdrawn from Tekere’s account . . . repayments were also made in the account of the deceased (Tekere) amounting to $10 963,16 . . . as of July 2015, the balance outstanding on the account is in the sum of $23 180,24,” the bank said.
However, in response to the claim, Mandaza said the estate was denying that the loan agreement incorporated a provision that would enable the bank to charge penalty charges.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
“This interest rate of 28% per annum appears to be a penalty interest and the facility agreement does not incorporate a provision, which enables plaintiff (CBZ) to charge interest,” he said.
Mandaza said he advertised Tekere’s estate in the Government Gazette and Manica Post on February 17, 2012 calling on creditors and debtors to lodge their claims with him by March 17, 2012, but the bank failed to do so.
“Plaintiff (CBZ) failed to lodge its claim with the first defendant by March 17, 2012 and instead sent its letter of demand to the first defendant dated March 12, 2015. Furthermore, the plaintiff failed to submit pertinent documents to the first defendant in its letter of demand such as loan facility agreement dated December 11, 2009, bank statements of the deceased and a copy of the mortgage bond,” he said, urging the court to dismiss the claim.
