The Body Corporate of Bondi in Roodepoort has secured a ruling from the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, permitting the sale of a property due to unpaid levies amounting to R50,974,31. File Photo
Image: File Photo
In a landmark decision, the Body Corporate of Bondi in Roodepoort has secured a ruling from the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg, permitting the sale of a property due to unpaid levies amounting to R50,974,31.
The ruling comes after one of the co-owners, Siboniso Caleb Sithole, appealed the ruling initially made by Roodepoort Magistrates Court in September 2022.
When the initial judgment was made in the lower court, the outstanding mortgage bond for the property was over R632,000 and the municipal debt had amassed to over R77,000, further complicating the owners' financial situation.
At the time, the estimated market value of the immovable property was R1.4 million.
Sithole and Sibusiso Derrick Ndebele bought the property for R609,000 at the time.
The issue started in October 2018 to May 2019, when the property raked over R50,000 in unpaid levies. When a summons was issued in October 2019, the owners failed to respond. As a result, the court issued a default judgment against them.
Subsequent to that, the Body Corporate obtained a writ of execution against movable property owned by Ndebele and Sithole to reduce the debt they owed. A sheriff went to the property at least two times and was unable to attach any movable property.
It's unclear when, but at some point, the sheriff managed to talk to the co-owners, and they said they don't have movable property that can be attached and sold in execution to reduce their debts to the Body Corporate.
According to court papers, Ndebele moved out and only Sithole occupies the property.
Sithole offered a payment plan of R2,000 a month, but his proposal was rejected.
In a bid to stop the sale, Sithole sought relief in the high court and referenced Section 26 of the Constitution, arguing that if the house was to be sold, the action infringed upon his right to adequate housing.
However, Judge Brad Wanless dismissed this assertion after establishing that all possible alternatives had been thoroughly examined by the Body Corporate before resorting to the execution of the property sale.
It was said that collecting money through means of attaching movable property also failed.
Regarding Sithole offering to pay a monthly, R2,000, the Judge said he failed to disclose what he is presently paying in respect of loans or what income he was receiving.
The Judge also noted that when the first judgment was granted, the Magistrate noted that the market value of the immovable property, and the amounts owing to creditors, as well as the judgment debt, resulted in a surplus of over R724,000. So, selling the house was the best option as Sithole will no longer be required to make payments in respect of the bond or levies.
It was suggested that Sithole use his money towards securing accommodation and he won't suffer any prejudice as he had claimed.
Moreover, Judge Wanless said the sale of the property would not immediately lead to eviction, as a three-month suspension period was granted for the co-owners to either settle their debts or initiate a voluntary sale.
He reiterated that the execution against a primary residence should always remain a last resort. However, in cases where all other avenues have been exhausted without success, such a measure can be warranted.
The application was dismissed with costs against Sithole.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL