Online Reporter
Tendai Gukutikwa
Weekender Reporter
A LOCAL businessman has been dragged into Chief Mutasa’s community court after being accused of illegally selling off family land entrusted to him decades ago.
The long-running feud erupted last Saturday, with Elijah Mubvuma accusing neighbour Sydney Sanhanga of betrayal.
Mubvuma claims Sanhanga was allowed to use the land in the 1990s for a shop and poultry projects — but instead went on to parcel out and sell portions to outsiders.
“He came to our homestead looking for land to start his business ventures, particularly a shop and some poultry projects, and my father agreed to accommodate him. At the time, it was done in good faith, with the understanding that he would only use the land for those specific purposes,” said Mubvuma.
However, Mubvuma said the situation has since taken a troubling turn, with several individuals now occupying the land and allegedly claiming ownership through purchases made from Sanhanga.
“Fast forward to today, we are being blocked from using that same land because people are now saying they bought it from him. Our children want to initiate their own projects there, but they are being denied access by these individuals,” he said.
He stressed that his family is not interested in dismantling existing infrastructure such as shops or church buildings, but rather wants access to the remaining land for youth development initiatives.
“We are not fighting over what has already been built. What we want is the land that can still be used for projects, especially for the benefit of our youths. It is disheartening that we are now being treated as outsiders on land we consider ours,” he clarified.
Backing his father’s claims, Josia Mubvuma told the court that the dispute has been ongoing, with the family making repeated efforts to reclaim the land, which he described as part of their ancestral heritage.
“This issue has been dragging for a long time. From our understanding, this land belonged to our grandfather, and it is painful to see it being controlled by others while we are left without anything to develop our own projects,” said Josia.
In his defence, Sanhanga dismissed the allegations as unfounded, and expressed surprise on being dragged to court over the matter.
He maintained that his occupation of the land was lawful and had nothing to do with Mubvuma’s family.
“I was shocked to be summoned here over false claims. This land was never allocated to me by Mubvuma’s father, and I have no idea where that assertion is coming from,” said Sanhanga.
He told the court that his journey to acquiring the land began in 1996 when he sought to establish a poultry project and approached the then councillor for assistance.
“I went through the proper channels. The councillor directed me to a piece of land that had been set aside for development projects in the area. I was referred to the relevant village head, who was not Mubvuma’s father,” he explained.
According to Sanhanga, the allocation was done with the involvement of the Mutasa Rural District Council, giving him the legal right to occupy and utilise the land.
“I was officially allocated that land, and I went on to establish a poultry project with about 5 000 chickens. After some years, the council came in and pegged additional land for other developments like a grinding mill and shops. Those were council initiatives, not mine,” he said.
He also refuted claims that he sold land to other individuals, insisting that those currently occupying parts of the area were allocated their stands through council processes.
“The people being mentioned here did not buy land from me. They followed the same procedures through council. It is unfortunate that accusations are being made without any verification. Had Mubvuma consulted either me or the council, this matter might have been resolved amicably,” he said.
After hearing submissions from both sides, Chief Mutasa ruled in favour of Sanhanga, citing the role of the local authority in allocating and demarcating the land.
“The land in question was properly pegged and allocated by council. As such, those who were given that land have every right to remain there and continue with their projects,” Chief Mutasa said in his ruling.
He urged the Mubvuma family to refrain from interfering with individuals occupying the land, and advised that any concerns should be channelled through appropriate administrative structures.
“Leave those people to continue with their work on the land that was legally allocated to them,” he said.
