---

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

GAUTENG DIVISION, PRETORIA

 

Case No: 084823/2023

(1)      REPORTABLE: No

(2)      OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:  No

(3)      REVISED

 2 June 2025

WRIGHT J

 

In the matter between:

 

RENEILWE LEGAE MENTOOR                                                             APPLICANT

 

and

 

ELIZABETH NALEDI MAGONGOA 

( In her capacity as executrix )                                            FIRST RESPONDENT

 

NELSON MAGONGOA                                                       SECOND RSPONDENT

 

MASTER OF THE HIGH COURT                                          THIRD RESPONDENT

( Estate 7115/23 )

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

WRIGHT J

 

1.     The applicant, Ms Mentoor is the daughter of a man who passed away on 10 August 2023. The first respondent, Ms Mangogoa is a relative of Ms Mentoor. Ms Mangogoa is the appointed executrix in the deceased estate. The cited second respondent, also a relative, has apparently passed away since the launch of the application. The third respondent apparently does not oppose the application.

 

2.     Ms Mentoor seeks a range of orders. The Master is to remove Ms Mangogoa as executrix, Ms Mangogoa is to disclose information and make payments to the estate and related relief is sought.

 

3.     Ms Mentoor says, in a somewhat terse founding affidavit,  that she agreed to the appointment of Ms Mangogoa as executrix in circumstances where she was deceived. Many irregularities in the winding up of the estate are alleged.

 

4.     Ms Mangogoa’s late answering affidavit raises huge disputes of fact which cannot be resolved on paper. Ms Mangogoa seeks condonation for the late filing of her answering affidavit as family deaths caused the affidavit to be late.

 

5.     On 1 June 2025, the day before the present hearing, an affidavit was filed  by Ms Engelbrecht, the agent of the present executor, Ms Elizabeth Magongoa, the first respondent. She says that 85% of the estate has been completed. Ms Engelbrecht is not a party to the present application. She wishes to be joined. Mr Ramapuputla, for the present applicant opposes such joinder. In the circumstances, the matter should be postponed and Ms Engelbrecht put on terms to deliver her application.

 

6.     In her answering affidavit, Ms Elizabeth Magongoa raises the defence of the non-joinder of Ms Engelbrecht.

 

7.     I make no finding on the question of whether or not Ms Engelbrecht can or should be joined.

 

8.     What complicates matters is that there is a related application, which it seems, may overlap the present application. In that application, an order has been made referring the matter to evidence or trial on at least one issue.

 

9.     In the circumstances, costs should be reserved.

 

ORDER

1.     The matter is removed from the roll, costs reserved.

2.     Ms Engelbrecht must launch her application to intervene by 17 June 2025 at 4pm.

 

 

GC Wright

Judge of the High Court

Gauteng Division, Johannesburg

 

HEARD                   :    2 June 2025

DELIVERED           :    2 June 2025

 

APPEARANCES    :

Applicant	Att NE Ramapuputla
	Instructed by
	Ramapuputla Attorneys Inc
	ramapuputla.attorneys@gmail.com
First Respondent	Mr CL Mabasa
Instructed by	Mabasa CL Attorneys Inc
	mabasaclattorneys@gmail.com
	admin@mabasaclattorneys.co.za
For Ms Engelbrecht	Adv L Keijser
Instructed by	Pistorius Scheepers

---