Judgment No. SC 18/18 Civil Appeal No. 137/16 Shorai alleged that there was no response to her letter of 4 June 2002 till 10 July 2002 when Dzingai purported to pay the outstanding balance. On 12 July 2002 her legal practitioners wrote another letter to Dzingai’s legal practitioners stressing that the contract had been cancelled and enclosing a cheque for ZW$454 037.93, being the money the respondent had tendered in his attempt to pay part of the outstanding balance. Shorai alleges that notwithstanding the cancellation of the contract Dzingai made an application in November 2002 for condonation of his non-compliance with the order of 9 May 2001 but did not pursue it. It was dismissed for want of prosecution in February 2003. It was contended on behalf of the late Dzingai’s estate that the application was not an application for condonation per se, but an application for reversal of the donation made by Shorai to her children who are the second to fourth appellants, which it is alleged was in clear violation of the order of the High Court granted by HLATSHWAYO J (as he then was) against the alienation of the property. That order was to remain in force “pending the finalization of the Arbitration proceedings” which were finalised on 28 February 2002. Shorai’s donation to the second to fourth appellants was effected on 31 January 2003 long after the arbitration proceedings had been finalized. The transfer was registered in the Deeds Registry and reflected on the title deeds in the second, third and fourth appellants’ names. On 9 May 2003 Dzingai, through his legal practitioners, filed an application for condonation of his failure to comply with the judgment of BARTLETT J, which Shorai opposed. He subsequently withdrew it when he changed legal practitioners. The new legal practitioners filed 4