HIGH Court judge Justice Amy Tsanga has blocked the eviction of more than 40 families from Chitungwiza which risked having their houses demolished.
Tsanga issued an interim interdict against Massmore Investments Private Limited until the matter is heard and finalised. The company claims to have been awarded the disputed land by the Chitungwiza Municipality.
"Pending determination of this matter, the applicant is granted the relief that respondents, their agents and employees, assignees and agents be and are hereby interdicted from negatively interfering with applicants of the cited stands located in Manyame Chitungwiza," Tsanga ordered.
The affected house owners approached the High Court on an urgent basis seeking to stop the imminent demolition of their properties by the private company.
In an affidavit submitted to the High Court, Lovemore Chitsuro stated that they lawfully acquired their stands. The applicants cited Massmore Investments, Chitungwiza Municipality and the High Court sheriff as respondents.
Chitsuro said he was issued with an offer letter and lease agreement for his stand measuring 800 square metres in Manyame Park by the municipality. However, the sheriff was authorised by High Court judge Justice Gladys Mhuri to demolish his property and that of his neighbours.
The affected residents filed a court challenge.
Chitsuro said on November 15, 2023 they engaged the sheriff through their representatives and were advised that their properties would be demolished.
- Fresh land invasions hit Whitecliff
- Chitown workers unpaid for 5 months
- Pomona cash row escalates
- Border Timbers targets European markets
Keep Reading
“Unless urgent relief is granted, we risk having our homes destroyed and we risk becoming homeless during this deadly cholera period, yet we are in lawful occupation,” he submitted.
According to Chitsuro, his offer letter came with a condition that he was supposed to pay ZWL$23 930 and he complied.
Chitsuro said he was issued with a lease agreement in September 2020.
He said all the documentation was done through the municipality.
“I was shocked when I was advised that my stand was marked for demolition pursuant to an order which I was not aware of and which had absolutely nothing to do with me,” he said.
“Given the fact that I was lawfully allocated the stand, I ought to have been made a party to any proceedings that would have an effect on the occupation of the stand, which was not the case.
“I, therefore, submit that the order to evict [me] and demolish my property is illegal and unconstitutional as it deprives me of my right to be heard in court. The sheriff cannot demolish the property of a person who was not cited in a court order and who did not occupy the property based on illegal occupation of other people,” he added.
