Pretoria - A homeowner who fell into arrears with his bond payments asked the high court in Johannesburg to set aside the sale and the subsequent transfer of the property to a new owner.
His multimillion-rand mansion was sold in execution for R360 000 at a public auction.
Dayalan Munsami told the court the property was his primary residence. The valuation report calculated the value of the property to be worth between R3.38 million and R4.94m, yet it was sold for next to nothing.
In asking the court to set aside the sale in execution and transfer to the new owner, Munsami argued there was non-compliance by Standard Bank regarding the provisions of the applicable law prior to the sale and transfer.
The sale in execution followed an earlier order granted by the court in 2019, when the bank said Munsami was so far behind in his bond payments it was unlikely he would ever be able to make good.
The bank applied at the time for summary judgment, which declared the property specially executable. The court authorised the Registrar to issue a writ of execution without setting a reserve price for the property.
The bank argued Munsami was “called upon” to place facts and submissions before the court to oppose the application for the property to be sold in execution.
In that application the bank set out the amount of the monthly instalments, the amount he was in arrears and the date of the last payment.
These allegations were supported by a statement of account.
The bank argued it was unlikely Munsami would be in a position to pay his indebtedness within a reasonable time. It argued there was no alternative or less invasive means available to satisfy the anticipated judgment debt.
The bank also issued the court with an automated valuation report in setting a reserve price should it decide to do so. The valuation report calculated the “high value” of the property as being R4.94m, whereas the “low value” was calculated at R3.38m.
Despite Munsami being legally represented at the time of the summary judgment application and order, he did not deliver any answering affidavit setting out a defence.
Summary judgment was obtained by the bank against Munsami, and the property was declared specially executable and sold on public auction for a fraction of what it was worth.
Returning to court in a bid to overturn the sale, Munsami said he was prejudiced and had suffered as a result of the sale without any reserve price. He blamed the bank for this, and contended it should have done things differently in law.
He objected there was no reserve price for the sale as set and that the property was sold far below the “low value” calculated in the automated valuation report.
The transfer was registered in November last year, but Munsami refused to budge. The new owner, meanwhile in February this year, launched an application to have him evicted from the property.
The court, however, turned down Munsami’s application to have the sale overturned and found that he was at the time of the first application – when the property was declared executable – represented by a lawyer who did not state his side of things.
The order was obtained in accordance with the law and the fact that no reserve price was set was neither the court nor the bank’s fault.
Pretoria News