NATVERLAL MORARJI PATEL
VEEMCO (PRIVATE) LIMITED
HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE
HARARE, 26 September 2017 & 28 June 2018
T Mpofu, for the 1st and 2nd applicants
H Ranchhod, for the 1st and 2nd respondents
CHITAKUNYE J. This is an application described by the applicant as “court application for mandamus orders to pay and to sell property alternatively a winding up.”
The applicants founding affidavit is a convoluted lengthy document in the mode of a lengthy story that goes back and forth without being precise. This in my view is a typical example of what an affidavit should never be. In my view an affidavit should be factual, concise and chronologically clear and to the point. It must contain facts that are relevant to establish the cause of action and the relief being sought. Information that is irrelevant must be avoided.
In casu, the founding affidavit before me comprises 26 pages long comprising 26 paragraphs most of which have subparagraphs. As if that was not enough the answering affidavit comprises 22 pages consisting of 30 paragraphs most of which have subparagraphs again convoluted and not concise. Much of the information contained in the affidavits was really not relevant to establish the cause of action or relief sought.