About SAFLII
Databases
Search
Terms of Use
RSS Feeds
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
>>
2015
>>
[2015] ZAGPPHC 775
|
|
Participate in Power Navigate (Pty) Ltd t/a "Pen" v Ngoveni and Another (52995/15) [2015] ZAGPPHC 775 (18 August 2015)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG DIVISION,
PRETORIA
Case Number: 52995/15
DATE: 18 AUGUST 2015
In the matter between:
PARTICIPATE IN POWER NAVIGATE (PTY)
LTD t/a “PEN"
.................................
APPLICANT
And
CONRIDE
NGOVENI
............................................................................................
1ST
RESPONDENT
THE CITY OF TSHWANE MUNICIPALITY,
PRETORIA
.............................
2ND
RESPONDENT
Coram: HUGHES J
REASON FOR COURT ORDER
Heard on: 21 July 2015
DATE: 18 AUGUST 2015
HUGHES J
1. This matter was struck off from the
urgent roll on 21 July 2015 for want of urgency with costs.
2. The reasons for the above order is
that the applicant failed to follow the practice directive in terms
of the practise manual
of this division. Less than a day was granted
to the respondents to file their answering affidavit.
3. The sequence is as follows; An order
was granted in terms of section 4(2) of the Prevention of Illegal
Eviction from and Unlawful
Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998 on 14
July 2015. This notice was served on the respondents on 15 July 2015.
The notice of set
down was also served on 15 July 2015 for the matter
to be heard on 21 July 2015.
4. The first respondent served his
notice of intention to defend on 15 July 2015 at 11:00am and its
answering affidavit on 17 July
2015 at 12:42pm.
5. In the circumstances the applicant
failed to ensure that the documents relevant to the application were
filed with the Registrar
by 12:00pm Thursday 16 July 2015 for the
matter to be heard on Tuesday 21 July 2015 in terms of 8.1, 8.2 of
the Practice Manual
13.24. A further reason is that the applicant
failed to make out a case in respect of locus standi in its founding
affidavit, Neither
does the applicant illustrate whether it is the
owner or on what premise it has the locus standi to launch this
application.
6. For the above reasons the
application is dismissed with costs.
W. Hughes Judge of the High Court