By Court Reporter
HARARE – High Court Judge ,Justice Nyaradzo Munangati has stopped ‘fraudster’ WestProp Holdings owner Ken Sharpe from further duping Zimbabweans and ordered the uplifting of judicial attachment on stand 654 Pomona Township void while directing the property be advertised for sale.
Sharpe’s prospects of raising capital from Victoria Falls Stock Exchange (VFEX) listing also stopped with the judgement which ordered the sale of one of the sites the company is intending to develop.
Controversial land baron Sharpe has been accused of stealing and duping several home seekers and Zimbabweans using top government officials through bribe and corrupt tendencies.
Justice Munangati further ordered that any transfer of title deeds in respect of stand 654 Pomona be cancelled.
In addition, Justice Mungangati declared that the judicial attachment of Stand 654 Pomona Township be restored as its upliftment was set aside.
Ken Sharpe’s company Augur Investments entered into a contract agreement with Fairclot Investments trading as Truck and Construction Private Limited (T&C Construction) for the construction of the Airport Road and was offered part of Stand Number 654 Pomona Township as payment.
After completing the construction of Airport Road, Fairclot Investments was set to get a payment of US$4.8 Million from Augur Investments.
Following the promulgation of the controversial Statutory Instrument 33 of 2019 which declared that debts owed in United States dollars could be settled in local RTGS at a rate of 1:1, Augur Investments transferred ZWL$4.8 Million and ZWL$1 078 040.21 as the principal and interest to Fairclot Investments resulting in the Sheriff of the High Court releasing title deeds of Stand Number 654 Pomona Township which was being held as judicial attachment.
The applicant Fairclot Investments represented by Mutumbwa, Mugabe and Partners challenged the upliftment.
Justice Munangati ruled that the decision of the Sheriff of the High Court to uplift the judicial attachment on Stand 654 Pomona Township which was held under Deed of Grant 2884/10 be set aside.
“It is ordered that the decision of the second respondent to uplift judicial attachment on Stand 654 Pomona Township held under Deed of grant No 2884/10 be and is hereby set aside. The upliftment of the judicial attachment on Stand 654 Pomona Township be declared void. Stand number 654 Pomona Township be and is hereby placed under judicial attachment.
“Any and all transfers of title effected between the date of upliftment of judicial attachment by second respondent to the date of this order are hereby declared cancelled. The registrar of Deeds be and is hereby directed to cancel the transfer of title effected on Stand No 654 Pomona Township held under Deed of Grant No. 2884/10 after 10 days of the granting of this order.
“The second respondent is hereby directed to advertise for sale Stand 654 Pomona Township, held under Deed of Grant No. 2884/10 within 10 days of this order. Second respondent shall pay the applicant cost of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale,” read Justice Munangati’s ruling
The case was one of the many cases that WestProp left out from its prospectus when it sought listing on the Victoria Falls Stock Exchange.
The controversial company raised only US$14 050 instead of US$10 million after selling 1 405 out of one million ordinary shares on Friday.
It raised a further $276 590 from 55 318 preference shares when it aimed to raise US$30 million. A further 600 000 preference shares were taken up by the underwriter. The company raised a total of US$3 290 640 against a target of US$30 million.
Westprop Holdings published its initial public offer on 28 March intending to list on the Victoria Falls Exchange (VFEX), which is US-dollar denominated, on Friday, 28 April.
Westprop said it was going back to the Vfex to ask for an extension of the share offer.
The listing of Westprop on the VFEX was being challenged by a group of investors represented by prominent Harare Lawyers from Mutumbwa, Mugabe and Partners.
The investors said Westprop Holdings did not publish all the litigation cases against the company in its prospectus and should therefore not be allowed to list.
