Court to rule on Mugabe’s potato wrangle

The dispute between former President Robert Mugabe’s family business, Gushungo Holdings and Seed Potato Co-op (Pvt) Ltd, is set to be resolved today at the High Court where the two parties will appear before Justice Helena Charehwa.

BY CHARLES LAITON.

The seed company last year obtained a default judgment against Mugabe’s business on a case involving $174 183, which Gushungo is challenging.

In another matter, Gushungo petitioned the court claiming $712 530 compensation from Seed Potato, accusing the company of selling substandard seeds contrary to the parties’ agreement.

According to court papers, the former Head of State’s business was on July 2, 2018 slapped with a $174 183 default judgement after failing to defend the litigation that was instituted by the seed company in May last year.

But through Gushungo Holdings’ representative, one Farai Jemwa, Mugabe’s business claims it never received the summons save to read about the issue in the Press, adding it later turned out that the said court papers had been served on a person not employed by the former First Family’s business.

The default judgment was granted by Justice Joseph Musakwa.

In its own claim, the seed company said sometime between July and September 2015, it supplied Gushungo Holdings with 12 761 pockets of seed potato worth $382 830 of which Mugabe’s firm made part payment, leaving a balance of $174 193.

In a different, but related matter Gushungo Holdings, however, sued the seed firm claiming compensation on the basis that the company had sold them substandard seeds.

In its declaration, Gushungo Holdings said sometime in July 2015, it entered into an oral agreement with the Seed Potato whereby the latter allegedly agreed to supply quality imported seed from South Africa.

In terms of the agreement, the seed company was supposed to deliver potato seeds worth $752 000 and the seed delivery was to be done between July 6, 2015 and August 22, 2015.

But contrary to the agreement, Seed Potato allegedly failed to abide by the parties’ agreement culminating in the current litigation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *