Byo lawyer denies fraud charges levelled against him

BULAWAYO lawyer Brighton Ndove has dismissed charges of fraudulently duping a city woman of her residential stand in Matsheumhlophe suburb.


Ndove, a senior partner at Ndove, Museta and Partners law firm, was dragged to the Bulawayo High Court by Sikhanyisiwe Phiri recently on charges of conniving with two bogus estate agents to forge title deeds and an agreement of sale of her stand without her knowledge.

The stand was allegedly sold for $16 000.

In opposing papers filed last Friday, Ndove who is represented by Calderwood, Bryce Hendrie and Partners Legal Practitioners, dismissed the charges as frivolous and “ill-conceived”.

“It is my respectful submission that I have been wrongly cited in these proceedings for the following reasons: As the Deed of Transfer and all mortgage bond documents will show, I am not the conveyancer who caused the transfer,” he said.

“Although the conveyancer was my employee at the time, I still submit that I was wrongly cited as applicants cause of action is not premised on vicarious liability but fraud. On the above basis alone, I submit that the applicants’ action against me is ill conceived, malicious and without legal basis,” Ndove argued in his founding affidavit.

Phiri in her court papers sought an order nullifying the deed of transfer made in favour of Legion Majahana and Memo Shirto Mangaliso.

She also wants an order recognising her as the sole registered owner of the disputed property.

But Ndove said Phiri’s case should be dismissed with costs, adding her court action against him is “suspicious”.

“This transaction took place in April 2015. It is now two years and applicant, her agents or worse still her legal practitioners have never bothered to engage me by either a call, visit or even write me a letter of demand. I do not understand why the applicant chose to deal with me from a distance, the manner she has done.”

“It is my respectful submission that applicant used the wrong procedure when she initiated her case by motion as opposed to action proceedings for the following reasons. There can be no doubt that a case of fraud cannot be proven through papers. There is a need for viva voce evidence,” Ndove argued.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.