Pendigo Trade and Invest (Pty) Ltd v Dukhi (2023/096348) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1005 (6 October 2025)

begin wrapper begin container begin header begin slogan-floater end slogan-floater - About SAFLII About SAFLII - Databases Databases - Search Search - Terms of Use Terms of Use - RSS Feeds RSS Feeds end header begin main begin center # South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg You are here: SAFLII >> Databases >> South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg >> 2025 >> [2025] ZAGPJHC 1005 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Pendigo Trade and Invest (Pty) Ltd v Dukhi (2023/096348) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1005 (6 October 2025) Pendigo Trade and Invest (Pty) Ltd v Dukhi (2023/096348) [2025] ZAGPJHC 1005 (6 October 2025) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2025_1005.html sino date 6 October 2025 ###### IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG CASE NO: 2023-096348 1. Reportable: No 2. Of interest to other judges: No 3. Revised 6 October 2025 WRIGHT J In the matter between: PENDIGO TRADE and INVEST (Pty) LTD                                        APPLICANT and AVISHKAR HARILALL DUKHI                                                          RESPONDENT JUDGMENT – WRIGHT J 1.  The applicant, Pendigo seeks summary judgment against the respondent, Mr Dukhi. 2.  When summons was served, the particulars of claim were not annexed to the face of the summons. A short special plea, without a plea over, was filed. It sought the dismissal of the claim in the absence of particulars of claim. 3.  Pendigo sought summary judgment. It did so on the basis of the short special plea. 4.  Particulars of claim were filed. It is not clear to me whether this happened before or after the application for summary judgment was launched. In present circumstances, it is not necessary to go into this point. 5.  Mr Dukhi filed a fuller plea, after the filing of the particulars of claim. 6.  The present application for summary judgment is based squarely on the short special plea as originally filed. There is no reference in the affidavit in support of the summary judgment application to the plea as it presently stands. 7.  The failure by the applicant to deal with the present plea falls foul of Rule 32(2)(b) which requires a plaintiff seeking judgment, among other things, to explain briefly why a defence as pleaded does not raise an issue for trial. ORDER 1.  The defendant is granted leave to defend. 2.  The applicant is to pay the costs of the summary judgment application. Scale A applies. GC Wright Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division, Johannesburg HEARD: 6 October 2025 DELIVERED: 6 October 2025 APPEARANCES    : APPLICANT                   Adv JJ Du Randt Instructed by                 Jay Mothobi Inc renchi@jay.co.za RESPONDENT              M Mulaudzi Instructed by                Des Naidoo and Associates dnattorneys@gmail.com sino noindex make_database footer start