Outstanding lobola lawsuit

Gibson Mhaka
IN probably the most famous example of a seemingly frivolous lawsuit, a 62-year-old Bulawayo man was sued by his mother-in law who is demanding a beast which she claimed was part of outstanding lobola he was charged 40 years ago when he married her daughter.

Alfred Ndlovu from Nkulumane Suburb is at loggerheads with his mother-in-law Sakhile Sibanda over an outstanding beast.

Sibanda is claiming that her son-in law has failed or neglected to deliver the beast despite her spirited demands.

She is also demanding another beast as a gesture of gratitude for looking after his cattle before he took them from her some few years ago.

She said Ndlovu refused to leave a beast he had promised to give her as a token of appreciation as per African culture.

According to documents, the matter filed at the Bulawayo Civil Court under case number 7850/ 17 was initially presided over by Chief Dakamela whose jurisdiction the two parties a�� Sibanda and Ndlovua��s area falls under.

a�?Defendant (Alfred Ndlovu) is married to Filter Sibindi and they married at the Bulawayo Customary Court and before being married he was charged a total of eight head of cattle and he bought seven and left a balance of one valued at $500 which he failed to deliver despite demand by plaintiff who is mother of the defendanta��s wife.

a�?Defendant also had the cattle kept at the plaintiffa��s place and when he came to collect he refused to leave one beast that he had promised to give her as a token of appreciation as per African culture.

a�?Despite numerous demands, defendant has refused or neglected to pay the amount. Wherefore plaintiff prays for a sum of US$1 000 being the value of the two head of cattle that the defendant owed the plaintiff,a�? the papers read in part.

In his opposing papers, Ndlovu said he paid the beast in question in 2003 when he was collecting his three beasts which were being kept by the plaintiff.

a�?There are points in limen in this case, that have to be addressed that the contract for lobola of the defendant to his wife was between the defendant and his father-in-law who died in 2003. His estate was not registered and therefore they had no one who could stand at the executor of his estate without being appointed in terms of the law of the Deceased Estate.

a�?The plaintiff is the surviving spouse of the deceased and in the circumstances the plaintiff has no locus citandi to act as the executor of her deceased husbanda��s estate in vacuum of the provisions of the law.

a�?Defendant was charged lobola in 1977 and in terms of the law; the matter has prescribed since the years elapsed years ago. In the circumstances it is submitted that this case should not be entertained because it has prescribed, the debt was paid.

a�?Plaintiff admitted it at the Chief (Dakamela)a��s court, the Chief ruled and no appeal was filed against the Chiefa��s judgment and the plaintiff has no locus citandi.

a�?It is noted that the person behind the new claim is the plaintiffa��s son who was in South Africa and it looks like he did not find the cattle, and hence he is the one pushing the whole issue saying the remaining beasts were not paida�?.

He supported his opposing affidavits with a judgment from Chief Dakamela in which Sibanda openly admitted before the Chief that her son-in-law paid all the charged beasts.