HLOBISILE’S MUM TO RECEIVE E6M

MBABANE – At last! After waiting for five years for the final distribution of an estate, children of the late millionaire, Calvin Ndlovu, will share E6 million cash, which is expected to be received by their mother, Siphiwe.

The deceased was the owner of KK Supermarket and is the father to Liqoqo member Hlobisile Ndlovu. Hlobisile has 10 other siblings born from her mother. Her father died on February 17, 2001. 

Initially, it had been reported that the estate was worth E31.6 million, but the first distribution was conducted in 2015, where only immovable assets were distributed. The upcoming distribution was recently advertised in this newspaper. 

APPROVED

The Times SUNDAY has also seen documents dated August 10, 2020, that state that the office of the Master of the High Court has since approved the liquidation and distribution of the estate.

“In terms of the enclosed letter, the Master has, after numerous and lengthy correspondence, approved the liquidation and distribution account, which we have now advertised as lying open for inspection. The account is available for inspection at the office of the Master,” the letter reads.

It was forwarded by Nxumalo from Robinson Bertram Attorneys to M.B Magagula Attorneys.

It is reflected that available cash amounts to E6 million.

Collected

According to the documents, an amount of E593 086.82 has been collected as rentals from Buzzby Services. The rentals were collected from February 13, 2018, to January 2019. It is also stated that rentals collected from Shoprite U Save in Pigg’s Peak from January 2, 2018, up to February 2019 amount to E662 936.40.

The document states that an amount of E4 577 843.65 is kept at the Standard Bank, Market Fund with Stanlib Mbabane as per a letter dated March 4, 2019.

Another sum of E244 051.80 is said to be held by Nedbank call account No.02000055097 as per a statement dated January 7, 2019.

In total, cash to be distributed is E6 077 918.67. The executor of Ndlovu’s estate is seasoned lawyer Knox Nxumalo.

The Ndlovu family has, however, shared their concerns regarding the amount to be distributed.

Khibika Ndlovu has argued that they were expecting more than what would be distributed. He said according to invoices in the possession of the family, they believe an amount of E15 million cash should be available in the trust account. Khibika explained that this amount would be in respect of collected rentals for the years that have allegedly not been included. Making an example, he said Shoprite U Save was paying E50 000 per month as rent.

“If you multiply the E50 000 by 12 months the total becomes E600 000. This amount is just rentals for one year. If you check the distribution account, you will notice that other years have not been included. The question would be where the money for the other years is?” Khibika wondered.

“We have our own invoices and we know what is due to the family. In fact, we are not fighting anyone, but are just raising concerns regarding the distribution account,” he argued.

Khibika mentioned that the family wanted closure in the estate issue so that life can continue.

The Times SUNDAY has established that the cash would be awarded to Siphiwe, who will then share it with her children. The children include Hlobisile, Gcebile, Khibika, Siphetfo, Seth, Bright, Qondile, Mancoba, Mduna and Ncobile.

In 2006, according to a judgment posted by the Swazi Legal Information Institute (SwaziLi), the executor in the deceased estate of one Calvin Ndlovu, Knox Nxumalo brought an application to the High Court for a declaration that the marriage of Nellie Siphiwe Ndlovu and the deceased entered into by civil rites at Pigg’s Peak on 19 August 1966, was bigamous and, therefore, invalid by reason of a number of pre-existing customary marriages between the deceased and three other women. 

counter application

 In 2009, Siphiwe, in turn, brought a counter application for a declaration that the will and codicils of the deceased should be declared pro-non-scripto, that the deceased “be declared to have died intestate, and that the estate is administered intestate in terms of the Administration of Estates Act 1902.

In fact, the two applications were consolidated and heard by Judge Agyemang, who concluded that the civil marriage was a lawful one, in the community of property, and that the deceased’s will was null and void. 

Agyemang argued then that the appeal was against those orders. 

The court recorded that it was common cause that the deceased had executed his last will and testament on February 28, 1994 and had later executed four codicils.  

At the time of his death, divorce proceedings were pending between him and Siphiwe, and he had other children born from three women, whom he had married by Swazi Law and Custom before his civil marriage to the respondent in 1966.

The court also noted that the executor drew up a liquidation and distribution account to which Siphiwe lodged an objection. In her view, she was entitled to half the estate, having been married in community of property to the deceased, and she contended that the account did not reflect her half share.  

half-share

During the case, the appellant testified that in attempting to find a middle ground, he drew up a second account, taking funds from a notional residue to make up the difference between the half share claimed by the respondent and what had been bequeathed to her under the will. 

Both in his founding affidavit and in his evidence, the appellant made it clear that he had been concerned about the legality of the respondent’s claim to a half-share since Section 24 of the Marriage Act No.47 of 1964 seemed to him not to permit it. 

He was not aware of any endorsement on the marriage certificate of the respondent and the deceased showing an election to have their property governed by common law as opposed to Swazi Law and Custom. 

Most importantly, he had taken the view that the civil marriage was bigamous and, therefore, invalid since the deceased had been previously married to three other women in terms of Swazi Law and Custom, before his attempt to ‘resolve the impasse’ as set out in paragraph 6.8 of his founding affidavit, which allegations are not denied by the respondent in her answering affidavit.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: