In a bizarre twist of fate, a property valued at R1.5 million in Rivera Park North, Mahikeng, was auctioned off for just R1 000. The sale was part of a divorce settlement between Makgothu Rudolph Mosothoane and Moela Flora Mosothoane, who were married in community of property before divorcing in July 2022. The ex-husband, who was blindsided by the sale, has since taken legal action to contest the deal, which saw the house sold to his ex-wife’s attorney.
A Divorce Settlement Turned Sour
According to IOL, the court-mandated agreement required the house to be sold to the highest bidder, with the proceeds split equally. However, the ex-wife allegedly circumvented the spirit of the agreement by selling the property for a paltry R1 000 to her own attorney, effectively cutting her ex-husband out of his rightful share. Makgothu Mosothoane was understandably furious when he discovered the sale and promptly took the matter to court.
Auction Notice Discovered in the Yard
The details of this contentious sale emerged when Makgothu stumbled upon auction documents in July 2023. These papers, left in the yard, indicated that an auction was to be held on October 5. Assuming the auction would take place at the property, he took leave from work to attend. However, upon arriving at the sheriff’s office, he learned that the sale had already occurred, with the house sold for R1 000.
Court Battle for Justice
Unwilling to accept the outcome, Makgothu Mosothoane filed a court application to nullify the sale. He aimed to prevent the house from being transferred to his ex-wife’s name, citing unfairness in the process. His ex-wife, Moela, fought back, asserting that the auction had been advertised in the Mahikeng Mail and was held at the sheriff’s office, as required by law.
Judge Ronald Deon Hendricks presided over the case, revealing that the ex-wife knew of a legitimate offer to purchase the property for R900 000. Instead of accepting it, she allegedly asked her ex-husband to buy her out for R700 000. When he did not respond, she arranged the auction, ensuring the house went to her attorney.
Court Ruling: Unfair Sale Declared
The court found the sale to be inequitable, particularly because the house was not sold to an independent third party. Judge Hendricks ruled that the ex-wife’s actions were unjust and ordered her to pay the legal costs incurred by her ex-husband. The judgment highlights the importance of fairness in divorce settlements and the legal ramifications of undermining court agreements.
Conclusion
This case has sparked public interest, illustrating the complexities and emotional turmoil of divorce proceedings. It also underscores the need for transparency and integrity in property auctions. The ex-husband’s persistence in seeking justice may set a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes.
Comments