Thursday 19 March 2020


The four-year legal battle over the estate of late national hero, Cde Kumbirai Kangai, pitting his widow Miriam and two of their children against eight other children led by eldest daughter Mrs Mara Hativagone, has finally been resolved after the High Court found no merit in the case brought by the children.

Judge Justice Webster Chinamora quashed attempts by Hativagone and seven other children to strip their stepmother of her 50 percent shareholding in Luna Estates, a land development company.

Justice Chinamora dismissed the application by the majority of the late hero’s children for lack of merit.

In an interview, Mrs Kangai’s lawyer, Mr Volte Muza, confirmed the ruling saying Mrs Hativagone “failed to lead the evidence that establishes a reasonable case. Her evidence was hopeless.” Mrs Kangai’s application to have the case dropped was not contested and was granted with the consent of her eldest daughter.

Cde Kangai, who died in 2013, left a will stating that everything that belonged to him be shared between his wife and 10 children.

But his estate created a rift. Two of the children — Muchatenda and Fungai — sided with Mrs Kangai, while Ms Mara Hativagone had the backing of seven other children — Enea, Manyika, Ngwarirai, Rwatinyanya, Musadaro, Tiriwamambo and Freedom.

The dispute spilled into the courts after the Master of the High Court authorised the release of proceeds from a land development project to Mrs Kangai.

Ms Hativagone approached the High Court in March 2014 challenging that decision and sought an order declaring that the entire shareholding in Luna Estates (Pvt) Ltd should remain in their late father’s name. She claimed among other things that Mrs Kangai was not entitled to 50 percent of Luna Estates. 

On March 20, the same year Tiriwamambo, who was fighting on the same side with Mrs Hativagone, filed a separate application seeking the setting aside the Master of High Court’s decision to release the proceeds to Mrs Kangai.

He also asked for an order that the Master of the High Court be compelled to treat immovable assets vested in Luna Estates as if they were personal assets of Ms Pauline Mandigo, in her capacity as an executor of the disputed estate, for purposes of distribution to beneficiaries.

Again, no response was made to notice of opposition filed by Mrs Kangai’s lawyer. Herald


Post a Comment