Online Reporter
Online Reporter
PROPERTY developer Capevalley Properties has allegedly resumed construction works at Swallowfield Estates in Norton in a development that is considered to be controversial as there is reportedly a court order barring the company and one of the landowners, Mr Amos Chiduku, from undertaking any development work on the disputed property.
According to court papers, both Capevalley and Amos Chiduku were prohibited from commencing projects on the land in question.
In its latest newsletter, Capevalley announced that it had secured all the necessary regulatory approvals to proceed with the project.
“We now have all the required permits of law to resume our works at Swallowfield, Norton, being the following: environmental impact assessment certificate, development permit and subdivision permit — all issued through due process by the regulatory authorities, Norton Town Council and Environmental Management Agency,” the company said.
Capevalley revealed that construction works were progressing on schedule, with infrastructure upgrades being carried out in line with council specifications.
The company indicated it would seek a certificate of completion once the works were finalised.
In a bid to reassure stand holders, the developer also pledged to regularise property ownership through the registration of sectional title deeds.
“We assure you, our clients, that once we are on site we will start the process of sectional title deeds registration from the parent deed to individuals.
“Be prepared for this process as it secures real rights on your properties,” Capevalley stated.
However, Swallowfield representative Isaac Chiduku said he was not aware of the latest announcements by Capevalley and indicated that there are pending court cases.
“We still have some legal issues in courts. Court processes must start before anything else takes place on the ground,” he said.
He maintains that previous legal rulings have barred Capevalley, Drowack and Amos Chiduku from dealing with the property.
Past High Court decisions HH214/23, HH215/23 and a Supreme Court ruling (SC219/23) restricted Capevalley and its affiliates from acting on the land.
Despite Capevalley having been issued with an EIA certificate earlier this year, Swallowfield argues that such regulatory approvals cannot in themselves determine ownership of the land in question.
