HARARE – Tetrad Holdings (Tetrad)’s bid to reclaim 10 immovable properties sold by public auction to recover more than $5 million owed to National Social Security Authority (Nssa) has flopped after the Supreme Court struck the matter off the roll yesterday.
The bank, which was placed under provisional liquidation in 2015, has over the past few years been trying to stop the sale of the properties, which were used as collateral for a $5 million loan given to the institution by Nssa.
The financial institution approached the Supreme Court on appeal after the High Court allowed the sale and transfer of the properties.
However, the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice Luke Malaba, Tendai Uchena and Ben Hlatshwayo yesterday said the appeal papers were defective.
Efforts by Tetrad lawyers to have the matter postponed hit a brick wall after Malaba said that the matter was not properly before the Supreme Court.
Nssa lawyer Tawanda Zhuwarara told the court that there was no appeal before the court, which resulted in the parties agreeing to have the matter struck off the roll.
“By consent, the matter is struck off the roll with costs,” Malaba said.
It is alleged that the transfer of ownership to the buyers on some of the properties has since been effected since the High Court order, with Tetrad arguing that the properties were sold for prices way below their market value.
Efforts by the financial institutional to quash the High Court decision have been suffering major setbacks, one of which culminated into yesterday’s ruling.
In its court papers, Tetrad Holdings sought to stop Nssa, through the Sheriff, from transferring ownership of properties that its directors offered the pensions firm as collateral for a loan that the financial institution failed to repay.
According to court papers, the financial institution has been fighting to stop ownership transfer to the different buyers and to reverse the attachment and the subsequent sale of the assets, claiming the properties were sold for a song.
Tetrad Holdings further distanced itself from its subsidiary, Tetrad Investment Bank (Tib), and argued that court rulings against the bank, should not be confused for rulings against the holding company.
Nssa, however, insisted it had advanced the loan to Tetrad Holdings, not its subsidiary, and therefore it could not be stopped from selling the properties.