KillBait - News highlights delivered clearly and responsibly—no clickbait, no sensationalism
Court orders Sipho Ngwenya to repay R30 million to Ingonyama Trust after failed appeal
Photo: IOL
2026-05-24 00:03   Justice   11

Court orders Sipho Ngwenya to repay R30 million to Ingonyama Trust after failed appeal

Former Ingonyama Trust Board chairperson Sipho Ngwenya has been ordered by the Pietermaritzburg High Court to repay R30 million to the Ingonyama Trust following a legal dispute over the transfer of funds linked to a land sale in Hammarsdale.

The money was transferred in June 2018 to the trust account of his legal representatives, Jafta Incorporated, after the Ingonyama Trust sold land to the eThekwini Municipality.

According to evidence presented in court, Ngwenya allegedly authorised the transfer despite lacking the proper authority to do so, a claim supported by former ITB CEO Vela Mngwengwe.The dispute escalated when Ngwenya failed to adequately account for the whereabouts of the R30 million after receiving a formal letter of demand.

When the matter proceeded to court, he challenged the legal standing of Strauss Daly Incorporated, the law firm representing the Ingonyama Trust, arguing that they had not properly proven their mandate under Rule 7(1).

Although the law firm provided documentation to satisfy the rule, Ngwenya continued to dispute its compliance and attempted to have the proceedings halted on technical grounds.The court ultimately ordered Ngwenya to submit an answering affidavit addressing the Rule 7 issue, but he failed to comply.This non-compliance led to Advocate Credo Mlaba successfully obtaining an order striking out his defence.The court then ruled that Ngwenya must repay the R30 million within 30 days.

Ngwenya later sought leave to appeal the decision, but Judge Rajkumar Nirghin dismissed the application, stating that there were no reasonable prospects of success.

The judge found that Ngwenya had avoided providing substantive explanations regarding the transfer of funds and instead relied on procedural arguments.The court concluded that an appeal would not likely produce a different outcome, effectively upholding the repayment order.

Full reading at IOL

2206 
Top Trends
Topics
Top visited