Online Reporter
Tendai Gukutikwa
Weekender Reporter
A WOMAN who allegedly defied a court order and destroyed crops belonging to her late husband’s younger brother has been ordered to pay US$28 000 in compensation after sugarcane and pineapple plantations were sold and razed without his consent.
Chief Mutasa’s community court heard that Mildred Muzete had allowed her brother-in-law, Nevermind Mupindi, to farm a piece of land in Honde Valley for 16 years.
Mupindi said he developed the plot into a large-scale enterprise centred on sugarcane and pineapple production.
Although Muzete later sought to reclaim the land through the traditional court, Mupindi said he complied with the ruling, and was granted time to harvest his crops before vacating.
“I respected the court’s decision and had no intention of resisting it. The understanding was that I would first harvest my crops before leaving the land,” he told the court.
However, Mupindi alleged that Muzete approached the civil court for an eviction order, claiming he was refusing to leave.
He said she then disposed of the produce before he could harvest.
“While I was waiting to harvest my sugarcane, she started disposing the produce. These were not small fields, but a large-scale farming project that I had invested in for years. The sugarcane alone was worth thousands of dollars,” he said.
Mupindi accused Muzete of working with Jacob Nyamutuma and several labourers who allegedly harvested and sold the crops.
He said the loss wiped out his main source of income and had devastating consequences for his family.
“The destruction of my crops meant I could no longer adequately provide for my family or meet my children’s educational needs. The financial strain was severe,” he said, adding that after reporting the matter to the police without success, Mupindi sought an assessment from agricultural experts from the Agricultural and Rural Development Advisory Services (ARDAS) who valued the lost crops and related developments at US$28 000.
“The crops and developments were professionally assessed by ARDAS officers, who placed the value of my losses at US$28 000. Despite that assessment, she has refused to compensate me,” he said.
His wife, Tabitha Chikomba, corroborated his account before the court, maintaining that the family had suffered significant financial losses following the destruction of the crops.
The case took a dramatic turn when one of the labourers allegedly involved admitted they had acted on Muzete’s instructions.
Simon Chikomba said he and two others were merely following their employer’s instructions.
“We were carrying out instructions from Mbuya Muzete. There were three of us involved in the work, and we were acting as her employees,” he said.
Muzete was not present during the hearing.
Chief Mutasa adjourned the matter to allow Muzete, Nyamutuma and the other workers allegedly involved to appear before the court.
He criticised what he described as a blatant disregard for a previous court directive that prohibited interference with the crops pending Mupindi’s harvest.
“You were specifically instructed not to interfere with the crops, yet the evidence before this court suggests that the produce was cut down and disposed of regardless of that order. That amounts to contempt of court,” said Chief Mutasa.
He ruled that compensation for the US$28 000 assessed loss was payable and directed all parties allegedly involved to appear at the next hearing.
“The issue of compensation cannot be ignored. The assessed losses stand at US$28 000 and those implicated in the destruction of the crops must return to this court to answer for their actions,” he said.
The matter was adjourned to next week, when the court is expected to determine the extent of each party’s involvement in the destruction and sale of the crops, as well as the modalities of compensating Mupindi.
Chief Mutasa said the outlook was unfavourable for the labourers, identified as Peter and his colleagues, noting that evidence confirmed they had destroyed and sold the crops while the order was still in effect.
“Even if Muzete denies sending you, things will not be favourable for you in this court because you knew what you were doing, and you did not care, even though Mupindi and his wife, who are also your relatives, tried to stop you on countless occasions. All that matters is to prove that Muzete had indeed sent you, because if not, you will be paying the US$28 000 compensation alone,” said Chief Mutasa.
