Man who owes Standard Bank over R3 million loses SCA appeal to set aside auction on his mansion

A man who owes Standard Bank over R3 million on his bond and had his home sold, lost at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in a bid to set aside the sale and the subsequent transfer of the property to a new owner.

Dayalan Munsami was aggrieved that his Johannesburg multi-million-rand mansion was sold for R360,000 at a public auction.

The auction follows an order granted by the high court in 2019, when the bank argued that Munsami was too far behind in his bond payments it was unlikely he would ever be able to make good.

The house was subsequently bought by Hazel Irene Knowler in June 2021, and it was transferred to her name in November 2021.

The sale was conducted after the bank obtained a summary judgment against Munsami, and the property was declared executable, and it was sold on public auction for a fraction of what it was worth. 

During the application, the bank argued it was unlikely Munsami would be in a position to pay his indebtedness within a reasonable time. It argued there was no alternative or less invasive means available to satisfy the anticipated debt.

The court ruled in favour of the bank.

Despite Munsami being legally represented during the summary judgment application and order, he did not deliver any answering affidavit setting out a defence.

However, after the sale, he refused to vacate the house and in February 2022, Knowler filed an application for an order evicting Munsami from the property.

Munsami subsequently launched an urgent application in the high court seeking to set aside the sale of the house.

Returning to the same court in a bid to overturn the sale, Munsami said he was prejudiced and had suffered as a result of the sale without any reserve price. He blamed the bank for this and contended it should have done things differently in law.

He objected there was no reserve price for the sale as set and that the property was sold far below the “low value” calculated in the automated valuation report.

Munsami argued that the valuation report calculated the value of the property to be worth between R3.38 million and R4.94 million, yet it was sold for next to nothing.

The high court, however, turned down Munsami’s application to have the sale overturned and found that he was at the time of the first application – when the property was declared executable – represented by a lawyer who did not state his side of things.

Undeterred, Munsami turned to the SCA for a different outcome and the matter was heard by Judge John Eldrid Smith.

At the SCA, he argued that Knowler purchased the property at a price well below its true value, which according to him was somewhere around R6 million.

He said he was ‘shocked and outraged’ that she was allowed to purchase the property at six percent of its approximate value.

He said this demonstrate the bank’s lack of respect, bullying tactics, and total disregard for the rules of court.

However, judge Smith said he was not convinced that the bank acted in bad faith and prejudice Munsami.

The judge further added that Munsami only raised arguments after the sale in execution and the subsequent transfer of the property was completed.

"Munsami only has himself to blame for his unfortunate dilemma. He had enough opportunities to challenge the summary judgment order or to apply for the stay of the sale in execution.

"...It was only after Mrs Knowler had launched eviction proceedings against him that Mr Munsami filed his application to set aside the sale and transfer of the property, some three years after the order declaring the property executable and eight months after the sale in execution," said judge Smith.

"I am accordingly of the view that there are no reasonable prospects that the appeal would succeed, neither are there any other compelling reasons why the appeal should be heard," judge Smith added.

Judge Smith dismissed Munsami's application with costs.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL News