Durban - A Durban businessman has accused the trustee of a relative’s insolvent estate of acting “dishonestly and unethically” by apparently choosing to keep the R85 000 he deposited to buy their Newlands West property after they were declared insolvent.
This allegation was contained in an urgent application before Judge Themba Sishi on Monday.
However, Rakesh Haripersadh’s legal counsel, advocate Daisy Sridutt, told the judge that the matter between the parties had now been resolved.
She had also asked for an order by consent to be granted, adjourning the matter indefinitely, and for the trustees to pay the cost of the application.
According to Haripersadh’s affidavit, his brother and sister-in-law’s estate had become insolvent and he expressed an interest in buying their property, “primarily to preserve it for use by my family”.
The bank and the co-trustee of the insolvent estate, he said, accepted his offer of R850 000 and he had signed a written agreement and paid a deposit of R85 000.
However, a month later he requested that the agreement to be amended to substitute his name with the names of his other two relatives as the buyers.
Haripersadh said it was no longer desirable for him to buy the property at that stage due to possible “business issues”.
According to Haripersadh, a co-trustee said there would be a mutual cancellation of the sale and a new purchase and sale agreement would be finalised by the new buyers.
In the new agreement, Haripersadh said it was agreed by all parties that the R85 000 he had deposited would be used towards the new sale.
But Haripersadh claimed a few days later that the co-trustee apparently said the bank was “not amenable to apply the R85 000 to the sale” with the new buyers.
“At this juncture I respectfully submit that the conduct of the First Respondent (co-trustee) together with the Fourth Respondent (the commercial bank) is nothing short of dishonesty and opportunism,” read Haripersadh’s affidavit.
He said there was a mutual agreement and he was only informed of the change of heart after he had signed the cancellation agreement.
He said he was “appalled” at the bank and co-trustee’s conduct, and that the bank was dictating to a trustee in insolvency to conduct herself “dishonestly and unethically”.
Haripersadh felt the trustees and the bank had found an opportunity to forfeit his R85 000 deposit because of the cancellation agreement he had signed.
He said the bank and the trustees had refused to sign an agreement with the new buyers, but later asked them for confirmation of the sale by depositing the R85 000 before they signed the sale agreement.
“I respectfully submit that this conduct is highly irregular,” he said in his affidavit.
According to the order the judge granted on Tuesday, the R85 000 deposit would now be used as part of the purchase and sale agreement with the new buyers.
@noeleneb
Daily News