BY CHARLES LAITON
The late Zanu PF politburo member, Kumbirai Kangai’s Luna Estates (Pvt) Ltd has been dragged to the High Court by two people seeking an order declaring as null and void the cancellation of an agreement of sale of stands entered between the parties in May 2016.
= Josephat Mubvumba and Nicodemus Mubvumba recently filed summons against Luna Estates and Devine Aid Trust Company (Pvt) commonly referred to as Datco, accusing the firms of unilaterally cancelling their agreements of sale by alleging a breach of contract.
In their joint declaration, the two said between July 2015 and May 2016, they entered into agreements of sale in respect of stand numbers 69 and 275 respectively situated in the district of Zvimba.
In terms of the agreement, the two said, the purchase price of the stands were pegged at $33 600 of which a deposit of $336 was payable together with minimum monthly instalments of $150 over an 18-year period.
However, on July 5, 2019 the pair said Luna Estates wrote to them alleging breach of agreements, arguing that the pair had failed to pay 1% of the respective purchase price as deposit.
Luna Estates also alleged that they had defaulted in the payment of instalments and the sums of $4 457 and $5 057 were due and owing.
Soon after receiving the letter, the duo approached its lawyers who contacted Luna Estates requesting further particulars to the notice of cancellation of the sale agreements.
- 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
“Without responding to the letters of August 23, 2019, the first respondent (Luna Estates) proceeded to cancel the agreements between the parties. It was alleged that the plaintiffs had failed to regularise their breach,” the pair said.
“During the period February 2018 to date, the first defendant by its conduct prevented the plaintiffs from fulfilling their contractual obligations of paying monthly instalments by failing to specify where such payments were supposed to be made.
“For that reason, the plaintiffs cannot be held to have been in default of their monthly obligations to the first defendant,” they said, adding that they are seeking an order compelling Luna Estates to direct them to where they are supposed to pay. The matter is pending.
