By A Correspondent | In a precedent-setting case, Zimbabwe’s first Minister of Education, Dzingai Mutumbuka, has won a legal battle to reclaim his US$600,000 residence in Chisipite, Harare, after title deeds were stolen, forged, and sold fraudulently. The High Court, presided over by Justice Nyaradzo Priscilla Munangati-Manongwa, ruled decisively in favor of Mutumbuka, restoring justice in a case riddled with fraud and corruption.
The Fraudulent Scheme
The property, located at 90 Harare Drive, Colney Valley, Chisipite, was unlawfully sold using forged documents after Lynna Mlambo, a supervisor at the Deeds Office, accessed the title deeds and handed them over to her boyfriend, Tatenda ‘Shaft’ Wakatama. Wakatama forged his details on the document and returned it to the Deeds Office through an accomplice.
Using the fraudulent deed, the property was sold to Demetria Zirenga and Harrison Marange for only US$92,000, a fraction of its value. Despite paying just US$45,000, they occupied the property, evicting Mutumbuka through a court order issued on September 18, 2023, by Justice Webster Nicholas Chinamora, who has since resigned amidst allegations of misconduct.
Court Ruling
Justice Munangati-Manongwa declared the forged deed, attributed to Jonah Ngome, as “fraudulent, invalid, and of no force and effect.” She ordered:
• Zirenga and Marange to vacate the property within 15 days or face eviction by the Sheriff.
• The Deeds Office to expunge any record indicating that Ngome owned the property.
• Zirenga and Marange to cover Mutumbuka’s legal costs.
The Judge also criticized Zirenga and Marange’s lawyers, Hope Ndanaka Tirivavi and Advocate Method Ndlovu, for pursuing a baseless case, resulting in dismissal with costs.
Legal Precedents in Zimbabwe
The ruling draws from several landmark cases in Zimbabwean law that address property ownership and fraudulent deeds:
1. Mudzimu v Ngulube (2021) – The court nullified a fraudulent sale of land after establishing that the seller had no legal authority to transfer the property.
2. Murambiwa v Estate Late Murambiwa (2019) – The court emphasized that title deeds are prima facie evidence of ownership and cannot be altered through fraudulent means.
3. Makoni v Mpofu (2020) – This case reinforced the principle that forged deeds have no legal standing, and the rightful owner retains all rights to the property.
4. ZFC Limited v Taylor (2001) – Highlighted the duty of due diligence in property transactions and the liability of parties involved in fraudulent schemes.
5. Matanhire v BP & Shell Marketing Services (1999) – Established the importance of good faith in property dealings and the responsibility of buyers to verify title validity.
6. Mutyanda v Nyathi (2016) – Addressed the role of the Registrar of Deeds in maintaining accurate and reliable property records, condemning negligence that enables fraud.
International Precedents
Similar cases around the world underscore the importance of safeguarding property rights and dealing with fraudulent transfers:
1. United Kingdom: Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd (2013) – The UK Supreme Court underscored the need for transparency in property ownership and invalidated fraudulent transfers.
2. South Africa: Akbar v Patel (1974) – South African courts nullified a property transfer based on forged signatures, ruling in favor of the rightful owner.
3. India: Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v State of Haryana (2012) – The Supreme Court of India ruled that ownership cannot be transferred through fraudulent or fabricated documentation.
4. United States: Bryant v Bryant (2005) – A court in North Carolina invalidated fraudulent deeds and held parties accountable for engaging in deceitful practices.
5. Canada: Sharma v Smith (2014) – Reinforced the principle that forged documents cannot transfer legal ownership, regardless of subsequent transactions.
6. Australia: Black v Garnock (2007) – The High Court nullified a property sale based on fraudulent claims, emphasizing the priority of the true owner’s rights.
Impact of the Judgment
Justice Munangati-Manongwa’s ruling sets a robust precedent in Zimbabwe, upholding the integrity of property ownership laws. The judgment restores Mutumbuka’s ownership rights and directs the Deeds Office to maintain accuracy in its records, ensuring that fraudulent deeds are expunged.
The decision also highlights systemic corruption within the property and legal systems, calling for greater accountability. By addressing the role of lawyers, registrars, and accomplices in the fraud, the ruling serves as a warning against similar schemes in the future.
What’s Next?
With the forged title deed dismissed and the rightful owner reinstated, attention now turns to prosecuting those involved in the fraud. This case underscores the need for reforms in the Deeds Office to prevent further breaches and protect property owners across Zimbabwe.