Randfield Education Centre and Another v Life Enrichment Institute NPC and Others (2024/069500) [2024] ZAGPJHC 603 (26 June 2024)

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 >> 2024 >> [2024] ZAGPJHC 603 | Noteup | LawCite sino index ## Randfield Education Centre and Another v Life Enrichment Institute NPC and Others (2024/069500) [2024] ZAGPJHC 603 (26 June 2024) Randfield Education Centre and Another v Life Enrichment Institute NPC and Others (2024/069500) [2024] ZAGPJHC 603 (26 June 2024) Download original files PDF format RTF format make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_603.html sino date 26 June 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA GAUTENG DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG Case NO: 2024-069500 1. REPORTABLE:  No 2. OF INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES:  No 3. REVISED 26 June 2024 In the matter between: RANDFIELD EDUCATION CENTRE                                 1 st Applicant FARUK KATEREGGA                                                       2 nd Applicant and LIFE ENRICHMENT INSTITUTE NPC                               1 ST RESPONDENT GARTHARD STEFANUS JOUBERT                                 2 ND RESPONDENT GRISP PROPERTIES NIB HOMES (PTY) LTD                  3 RD RESPONDENT RICHARD FOWLDS                                                           4 TH RESPONDENT JUDGMENT WRIGHT J 1. The applicants seek urgently an order that they be reinstated to certain leased premises from which the applicants run a school. 2. Ms Bronkhorst, for the respondents does not clearly state whether or not the respondents oppose the main relief. In effect, she does not oppose the re-instatement. Nor does she oppose an order that they return equipment to the second floor. 3. The answering affidavit is clear. There has been no eviction or attempted eviction. The applicants’ property was moved by the respondents only because of a recent burglary which caused much damage. 4. A prayer for payment of R30 000 is not urgent. The question of costs is not urgent. The applicants are unrepresented. Costs should be reserved. ORDER 1. The respondents are immediately to restore the applicants and their property to the second floor, 100 Main Rd, Newlands, Johannesburg. 2. Costs reserved. GC Wright Judge of the High Court Gauteng Division, Johannesburg HEARD                 : 26 June 2024 DELIVERED         : 26 June 2024 APPEARANCE  : Applicant             In person Faruk Kateregga 071 702 3255/078 974 8526 randfieldschools.jhb@gmail.com Respondent        Adv M Bronkhorst Instructed by      Pelser Attorneys 012 342 0006 charlotte@pelserlaw.co.za amorette@bdk.co.za sino noindex make_database footer start