1

CIV\T\58\95

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO
In the matter between :

'MAMOSITO AGNES LETOAO Plaintiff

and
SEABATA MASELELA Defendant

JUDGMENT

Delivered by the Honourable Mr. Justice T. Monapathi on the 6th day of
March 1995

This is one of the claims for damages for the unjust and unlawful
killings whose circumstances seems not only most bizarre but whose
mystery is
increased by the fact that defendant while served with summons claiming for huge
sums of money decide not to defend the
claims. The Defendant was in prison when
he was served with the summons and had only been served on the 10th February
1995.

The Plaintiff, who is a widow of the deceased (NAPO LETOAO), gave viva
voce evidence to support her application for a judgment by
default, She claims
for payment of damages for sums of moneys

-2-as follows:

1.	M104.44 being compensation for loss of maintenance.
2.	Ml,639.70 being medical and hospital expenses.
3.	M1,580.00 being funeral expenses.

And in addition interest
thereon at 18% from date of judgment, costs of suit and further and alternative
relief.

The Plaintiff was married to deceased by civil rites on the 23rd June
1978 and the marriage subsisted until on the 20th January when
the deceased died
as a result of a gun shot wound. At the time of the deceased's death there were
four (4) children borne out of
the said marriage, namely, Mosito, a boy
born on the 7th April 1981, Nthabiseng. a girl born on the 6th October
1984, Mamotebang, a girl born on the 15th March 1988 and Manapo. a
girl born on the 10th January 1991. The deceased was at the time of his death
employed at Lesotho Airways Corporation and had
been so employed since 1986 and
had been earning M457.75 per month. When the deceased died he was about thirty
seven years of age
having been born in 1955. It means that if the deceased lived
up to the age 55 years, being the normal age of retirement, he would
have lived
for a further 19 years. It was on that basis

-3-

of 19 years multiplied by the monthly wages of M457.75 which the Counsel
for the Plaintiff persuaded me that it was such an amount
or its total that the
deceased would have been able to support his family with. This added to a total
of M104,362.44 which I accepted
as correct. This did not take into account the
various increases that would be made in the future to the salary. Indeed the
amount
did not take into account the fact that some of the children if not all
would have become independent along the line. But then the
deceased would still
be breadwinner to his wife. I do not think this Court could be obliged to
undertake such actuarial contingencies
unless strongly persuaded to do
so.

Indeed after his injuries the deceased was hospitalized in the Morija
Scott's Hospital in Maseru where he was hospitalized for four
(4) days. On the
3rd December 1992, deceased was transferred to Pelonomi Hospital in Bloemfontein
where be was hospitalized. Since
deceased could not respond to any medical
treatment, he was discharged but died at his home on the 20th January 1993, The
various
exhibits and receipts testify to the consequent hospital medical and
funeral expenses which I have found proved and for which I have
awarded damages
which will be stated at the end of this judgment.

On this fateful afternoon the Plaintiff was at his courtyard at Mazenod
Ha Nko in the district of Maseru. Not very far from

-4-

her was her husband. A distance away the Defendant was heard to say in
Sesotho, "Napo ke batla ho feta ka bolokolohi mona." (Napo,
I want to be able to
pass freely here). The deceased is reported to have replied that he did not
understand what the Defendant was
saying. There was a sound of gun report. The
shooting seemed to be directed at the deceased's dogs which in turn seemed to be
barking
out fiercely. Then the Defendant was moving towards the house where the
deceased was seen to be making effort to control and calm
the dogs. Deceased is
said to have even picked up a stick to beat up the dogs to calmness. It seemed
that if the deceased did not
act that way the dogs would succeed in attacking
the Defendant. There was another sound of a gun report emanating from where the
deceased and the Defendant were. The Plaintiff had then been about 15 paces from
the deceased. At that time the dogs had run off.
Immediately after gun report
the deceased was seen coming slowly towards his house with a wound on his head
which was bleeding profusely.
He fell down a few feet from his house. The
Plaintiff went to the assistance of the deceased who had fallen face down. An
attempt
was made to have the deceased sit up. This was unsuccessful. Attempts
were made to stop the bleeding. It was not successful. The
deceased had fallen
unconscious but was still alive.

One villager went to the chief to make a report about the injury to the
deceased. Villagers came to assist. One had a

-5-

blanket which was used to cover the deceased. All in all the deceased was
eventually taken to hospital as aforesaid. He had been unconscious
since the
injury. The hospital authorities informed the Plaintiff that her husband would
not recover. There had been a clot resulting
from a bleeding into the brain, the
skull having been fractured. The so called cerebral haemorrhage. This sad
information was relayed
to the Plaintiff during the last days of the deceased's
life, to explain why the deceased was released from hospital when not having
recovered at all, but to allow him to have a peaceful death at his own
home.

The Plaintiff was able to disclose that this apparent reference to
freedom of passage statement by the Defendant probably meant that
the deceased's
dogs were very fierce and threatened passage of people past the deceased's home
which was along a pathway. Defendant's
child was once chased by the dogs.
Plaintiff further disclosed that the deceased was not a well liked person in the
village. I did
not feel that these factors had much effect on the circumstances
of the stark unlawfulness of the attack nor the amount of damages
claimed.

In the premises I decided that the Plaintiff's claim ought to succeed and
I allowed the claim as follows against the Defendant:

-6-

1. Payment of M104,362.44 being compensation for loss
of
maintenance.

2.	Payment of M1,580.00 being funeral expenses.

3. Payment of M1,639.70 being medical and
hospital
expenses.

4.	Interest thereon at 18% from the date of judgment.
5.	Costs of suit.

The total of the first three claims
is an amount of M107,312.14.

T. MONAPATHI JUDGE