2
issue. The respondent oppos es the application and seeks its dismissal with
costs.
[2] The applicant contends that in terms of the agreement, it is the owner of the
motor vehicle. The respondent is in breach of the agreement in that he failed to
consistently and consecutively make monthly payments as agreed, particularly
between August 2024 and March 2025. As a result, he is in arrears in the amount
of R208 076,44, and despite demand, he has failed to remedy the breach.
Therefore, further contends the applicant, it is within its rights to cancel the
agreement and seek the return of the motor vehicle . It admits that it received
payments totalling R925 563,69 from the respondent. It, however, contends that
a balance of R326 618,74 is still owing in terms of the agreement.
[3] To resist summary judgment, the respondent must show that he has sufficiently
disclosed the nature and grounds of his defense and the facts upon which it is
founded; and the defense as disclosed is bona fide and good in law. 1 The
respondent denies that he is indebted to the applicant as alleged. He contends
that not only has he discharged her obligations in terms of the agreement, but he
has also overpaid the applicant. He alleges that the amount owing in terms of the
agreement was R431 000,00 and he paid R912 000,00 to the applicant.
[4] It appears that the respondent misconstrued his obligations in terms of the
agreement. R431 000,00 is the capital cost. In terms of the agreement, the total
contract cost repayable which is inclusive of the capital amount, interest and
other charges is R1 067 833,99. Despite paying the amount of R925 563,69, the
respondent is still indebted to the applicant for the full amount as set out in the
instalment sale agreement. Therefore, for this reason alone, the respondent’s
ground of opposition fails.
[5] Arrears accumulated on the account because the respondent did not keep up to
his monthly obligations in terms of the agreement consistently, particularly in the
his monthly obligations in terms of the agreement consistently, particularly in the
latter months. Notably, between August 2024 and March 2025, he did not make
any payments at all. As a result, inclusive of arrears as well as interest, he has
accumulated a cumulative amount of R208 076,43 in arrears. Arrear interest has
1 Maharaj v Barclays Bank Ltd 1976 (1) SA 418 (A).