IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE NO: 2025-087771
(1) REPORTABLE: YES / NO
(2) OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: YES/NO
(3) REVISED.
In the matter between:
NANYONJO RAHMAH
APPLICANT
And
ARIZEN REAL ESTATE (PTY) LTD
NAZRIN EBRAHIM
FIRST RESPONDENT
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
MALINDI J
Introduction
[1] This matter came before me as an urgent application and was heard on 20
August 2025.
[2] The following relief is sought in the Notice of Motion:
“5. Directing the respondents to restore, forthwith, to the applicant undisturbed
possession of the premises at Unit 1[..], B […] L[…] E[…], B[…], Gauteng, 1501 (“the
premises”) in the following manner:
2
5.1. By procuring forthwith that the front door of the premises be reinstalled and to
hand over the keys of the premises to the Applicant.
5.2. By delivering, forthworth, to the Applicant all the movable assets which the
Respondents have removed from the premises, including but not limited to
the prescription medication of the A pplicant’s 8 year old child, and the books
and all other educational documents belonging to the Applicant’s children.”
[3] On 13 June 2025, my brother, Raubenheimer AJ, heard an urgent application
about the same dispute and gave the following order:
“1. The matter under the above case number is reinstated on the urgent court
roll.
2. The Respondents are directed to restore, forthwith, to the Applicant
undisturbed possession of the premises at Unit 1[ …], B […] L[…] Estate,
B[…], Gauteng, 1501 (“the premises”) in the following manner:
2.1. by procuring forthwith that the front door of the premises be reinstalled
and to hand over the keys of the premises to the Applicant.
2.2. by delivering, forthworth, to the Applicant all the movable assets which
the Respondents have removed from the premises, including but not limited
to the prescription medication of the Applicant’s 8 year old child, and the
books and all other educational documents belonging to the Applicant’s
children.
3. There shall be no orders to costs.
3
4. No order is made as to the Applicant’ s praise in her previous N otice of
Motion in respect of damages caused by the R espondent’s illegal and
malicious eviction and respect of punitive damages.”
[4] Paragraph two of the Order means undisturbed possession of the premises
with all amenities or utilities provided to the premises such as water and
electricity. The Respondents understood this when they initially restored these
services. The Applicant in her supplementary affidavit does not state the exact
date the electricity was initially restored. She merely states that the
Respondents temporarily restored the electricity after she had written a letter
to them.
[5] Subsequent to this order and restoration of the services the respondents are
alleged to have disconnected these services. The reason is clearly because
the applicant is still in arrears in respect of the levies by the Body Corporate.
This is no justification for the respondents to take the law into their own
hands. Proper legal process provides for recovering such obligations from
tenants and owners.
[6] I have come to the conclusion therefore that the judgment and order of
Raubenheimer AJ be fully restored.
[7] Therefore the following order is made:
1. The Court Order of 13 June 2025 per Raubenheimer AJ remains valid
and enforceable.
2. The First and Second Respondents are ordered to implement this
order within three days of receipt of the order.
4
3. The Second Respondent is interdicted from harassing, assaulting,
disturbing or threatening the applicant directly or indirectly through the
agency of third parties.
4. Should the R espondents fail to implement this order , the Applicant is
permitted to supplement this application and enroll it for contempt of
court.
5. There is no order as to costs.
________________________________________
G MALINDI
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT
GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
Appearances
For the applicant: The Applicant in person
For the first respondent: Aronrajh Dookoo
For the second respondent: No appearance
Date of hearing: 20 August 2025
Date of judgment: 19 September 2025