Eugene Kondanani Chimpondah and Tidings Chimpondah v Gerald Pasipamire Muvami

### Preamble
HH 257-2011
HC 3954/09
EUGENE KONDANANI CHIMPONDAH
---------




EUGENE KONDANANI CHIMPONDAH

and

TIDINGS CHIMPONDAH

versus

GERALD PASIPAMIRE MUVAMI

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

CHIWESHE JP

HARARE, 7 October 2010

Adv R. Fitches, for the applicant.

Adv T. Mpofu, for the respondent

CHIWESHE JP:  This application arises from the judgment of my sister MAKARAU JP (as she then was) delivered on 21 November 2007 under case number HC 6844/06 (Judgment HH 81/2007).  The applicants sought and were granted an order that certain immovable property, namely, stand 658, of Quinington Township of Subdivision 6 of Quinington of Borrowdale be transferred to themselves pursuant to a contract of sale entered into between them and the respondent.

Dissatisfied with that order the respondent noted an appeal with the Supreme Court on 5 December 2007, under case number SC 274/2007.  The applicants then filed the present application, seeking leave to execute MAKARAU JP’s judgment pending appeal.  The application was heard on 7 October 2010.  The application has however been overtaken by events in that on 8 February 2011 and, pending determination of the application by this court, the Supreme Court, under Civil Appeal number no. SC 274/07, allowed the appeal with costs.  Needless to say, that order effectively disposes of this application.

Mr Fitches, for the applicant, pointed out a number of errors in the typed judgment of MAKARAU JP and asked that I formally effect the necessary corrections. The proposed corrections do not go to the root of that judgment. What is sought to be corrected are patent typographical errors.  The court is indebted to him in this regard.  I shall proceed to effect the corrections in terms of Rule 449 (1) (b) of the High Court Rules.

In the result I order as follows:

The application be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

Judgment HH 81/2007 be and is hereby corrected in the following respects:

2.1 At pages 2 and 5 by the deletion of “Chapter 9:04” and the substitution of      “Chapter 8:04”

2.2   At page 5 by the deletion, where it occurs, of the word “conventional” and the

substitution of the word “contractual.”

2.3 At page 6, line 24, by the removal of the word “not” so that line 23 and 24 read:

“on the basis of the above, it is my view that the protection afforded purchasers of

land on instalments under the Act is available to the applicants before me.”

Linda Chipato Legal Practitioners, 1st and 2nd applicants’ legal practitioners

Chingore & Associates, respondent’s legal practitioners