Pinnacle, Redcliff in property wrangle

council for the purchase of 400 hectares residential stands in the upmarket suburb of Engelbert, 30 ha for cemetery, 16 ha of commercial land and 20 ha land for various uses including a dam.
Redcliff Municipality charged US$658 000 for the land and Pinnacle paid US$363 954,30 before the agreement of sale was terminated.
The municipality argues that it cancelled the agreement after the company failed to comply with the conditions of sale including paying the full amount and completing the development of the property.
Pinnacle is challenging the cancellation of the deal on the basis that the municipality simply wanted to unjustly enrich itself by holding onto the land as well as the US$363 954 already paid.
The firm also accused the municipality of fraud on the basis that when the land was sold, the property was registered in the name of a third party called Steelmakers (Pvt) Ltd.
Redcliff Town Council has admitted that the land was registered in the name of Steelmakers but argued that it was just an error that has since been rectified.
Pinnacle has since filed summons at the High Court seeking an order compelling the municipality to transfer the property into its name.
Alternatively, Pinnacle wants the municipality to pay restitution of US$363 954 plus US$10 492 survey costs together with interest.
According to the plaintiff’s declaration, Redcliff advertised sale of the land in the local press and Pinnacle responded.
On July 27 2010, the parties entered into an agreement of sale for the property.
It was agreed that Pinnacle was responsible for the payment of administration charges, transfer fees and taxes that may become due.
The municipality reportedly indicated that the property was registered in its name and that Pinnacle was responsible for the development and survey of the land.
They agreed on a purchase price of US$658 000 payable in six monthly installments.
Transfer, according to the agreement, was to be effected upon completion of the survey and payment of the price in full.
After the company had paid US$363 954, it discovered that the land was registered in the name of Steelmakers and a query was raised with the municipality.
On July 29 2010, the municipality notified Pinnacle of the termination of the agreement of sale and the forfeiture of the US$363 954.
In the pleadings filed by the municipality’s lawyers, Mtetwa and Nyambirai law firm, Redcliff Town Council accepted that Pinnacle paid US$360 000 but denied that the company undertook any developments of the land.
It was also admitted that at the time of the agreement the land was registered under Steelmakers.
“While it is accepted that at the time of signature of the agreement of sale, the land was registered in the name of Steelmakers, Steelmakers did not own the land.
“The land belonged to defendant. The error regarding the registration was explained to the plaintiff and rectified as far back as September 24 2009 through Deed of Transfer dated 1177/09,” read the pleadings. The parties now await the set down date for the pre-trial conference before a High Court judge.