CIV/T/277/81

IN THE
HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

In the
matter of :

S. J.
MARAIS Plaintiff

v

T. E.
TSOAKO Defendant

JUDGMENT

Delivered
by the Hon. Chief Justice, Mr.Justice T.S. Cotran on the 20th day of
September

1982

The
plaintiff sued defendant for the arrears of instalments amounting to
M3400 on an Isuzu bus Reg. No. OB 50526 bought by defendant
on hire
purchase terms. The bus in question had been attached by the sheriff
in terms of a clause of the hire purchase agreement.
Default Judgment
was granted in favour of the plaintiff on the 7th June 1982.

The Isuzu
bus had in the meantime been valued by a "sworn appraiser",
Mr. C.D. Househam, an architect by profession, who
is the only sworn
appraiser in Lesotho according to Mr. Koornhof. He valued the bus at
M1500 and Mr. Koornhof moved the Court to
enter Judgment against the
defendant for the balance, viz, M1900 damages which the plaintiff
allegedly suffered.

The
Administration of Estates Proclamation (s.N)makes provision for the
appointment of "sworn appraiser" by the Master
of the High
Court for the valuation of estates and property. Such a valuation is
for the purpose of probate death duties and distribution
of assets to
beneficiaries. No doubt such an estate may include a vehicle but that
kind of property usually forms only a small
part of the assets and
quite frankly I do not know, and have not been told, what is Mr.
Househam's experience in the valuation

2

of buses,
though no doubt he may have general experience.

The Hire
Purchase Acts of both the Republic of South Africa and Lesotho (see
infra) introduce the concept of an "appraiser"
other than a
"sworn appraiser" under the Administration of Estate laws.
He can be any person who, by virtue of his experience
knowledge or
skill, as well as ability and reputation, is competent to determine
the value of goods of the relevant kind. (See
Claasen's Legal Words &
Phrases Vol. I 1975 Butterworths pp. 120 and 121).

An
"Appraiser" for the valuation of vehicles is provided for
in ss. 2 and 18 of the Hire Purchase Act 1974 (Vol. XIX 1974
Laws of
Lesotho). Admittedly the Act does not apply to hire purchase
agreements in excess of M4000 (and this one seems to be in
excess of
that) but I see no difference in principle if the object of the
exercise is the same, viz, to ascertain the value of
the vehicle in
the best manner the law could contrive for the safeguard of the
interests of all. Indeed it would seem from the
text of s.18 that
this course should be adopted not only in transactions relating to
vehicles subject matter of the Act but "in
connection with any
agreement" etc.....

I
therefore decline to enter judgment in the amount as prayed based on
that valuation and direct that the provisions of s.18 of
the Hire
Purchase Act 1974 be pursued in this case, Mr. Kolisang seems still
to be the attorney of record of defendant though he
says he is unable
to contact his client. The report should be in the form of affidavit
specifying the credentials of the deponent.

CHIEF
JUSTICE

20th
September, 1982

For
Plaintiff: Mr. Koornhof)

with
copy of Judgement

For
Defendant: Mr. Kolisang)