Court Gives Orphans “House” Built By Uncle

Não é difícil assumir que jogar por dinheiro é realmente lucrativo. Para apostar de verdade, você precisa criar uma página pessoal. O registro no site oficial Pin Up pinup-entrar.com envolve o preenchimento de um pequeno formulário e não leva muito tempo. Você só tem que realizar 2 ações.
By Dickson Jere
A man in Ndola owned a plot in Pamodzi area where he partially developed it before he passed, intestate. At his death, he was survived by wife and two minor children aged 2 and 5 years. As fate had it, his wife also passed. So, the children were taken in by their grandparents. No Administrator was appointed to deal with the estate of the deceaseds.
The grandfather of the children decided to allow his son in law to move on the plot, build the house and live in it but on condition that he should buy another plot for the two children when they grow up. The granny made this decision after the City Council had threatened twice to repossess the plot for non development.
The agreement was some sort of “family arrangement” and verbal between the grandfather and son in law who married a sister to the deceased mother of the two orphans.
However, when the children reached majority, they demanded for their property, which their late father left. When he wanted to offer them new plot as per agreement, they opted for cash. But when he wanted to pay them, they refused.
One of them even got appointed as Administrator of the Estate of their father.
But the man – their uncle – in possession of the property then demanded for compensation for the construction of the three bedroom house, cottage and several improvements he made, including putting a wall fence.
At that point, he also discovered that the Administrator (one of the children) had sold the property to a third party without his knowledge. The buyer paid them higher price than what they had agreed with their uncle.
He then sued the two children and the person who bought the property.
After trial, the Ndola High Court Judge had to first determine whether the man who made improvements at this house and stayed there could be protected at law.
“In the eyes of the law, the plaintiff is a trespasser who went onto the late Chanda’s property without permission from the persons (children) who could properly allow him,” the Judge observed.
“The plaintiff is not entitled to compensation for the improvements he made on plot…Pamodzi Ndola,” the Court ruled, adding that whatever is affixed on the land belongs to the owner of the land.
The Judge said whatever agreement he had with the grandfather cannot stand as the man who allowed him on the land did not have legal rights over the same land. The Judge said the uncle did not even pay anything for the same property.
Having ruled that the man cannot be compensated, the Court went further to determine whether the Administrator had legal rights to sell the property to third party without Court Order.
“In order for sale to be valid, an order of the court is a sine quo non. Without it, the sale is invalid,” the Judge said and went ahead to nullify the transaction.
“The title issued to the 3rd Defendant must be cancelled for improperly issued,” the Judge ordered.
The Court said the property should revert back to the owner who are the two children as beneficiaries of their father’s estate.
Case citation – Mathews Chali v Rex Chanda & Others – 2023/HN/0107 and judgment delivered last month.
Lecture Notes:
1. This case underscores the need for Administrators to first obtain Court Order before selling any property forming part of the estate of the deceased. This is a MUST!
2. Do not move on any piece of land without verifying the owner and capacity of the person you are dealing with. If owner of property is deceased, always deal with the Administrator or Executor of the Will.

source