Alois Ngonidzashe Maruta v Arosume Property Development (Pvt) Ltd

The plaintiff and defendant entered into an oral lease agreement for House Number 14 St Brelades Road, Colne Valley, Borrowdale, Harare at a monthly rental of US$1,300.00. Rentals were to be paid through Generation Revenue (Private) Limited represented by Mr Muhwadi. The defendant was represented by Mr Manson Mnaba as Director. The defendant failed to pay rentals for 9 months, amounting to US$11,700.00. The defendant was eventually evicted from the premises by order of the Rent Board without having paid this amount. The parties agreed that the defendant would erect a water tank at the premises which would become the plaintiff's property. The defendant claimed it did not pay rentals because it had carried out renovations totaling US$10,142.00 which it sought to offset against the rental arrears.

• Whether the parties agreed that the defendant would renovate the leased property and whether there was an agreement to offset renovation costs against rental payments
• Whether the defendant expended US$11,700.00 on renovating the leased property
• What amount, if any, was owing to the plaintiff in rental arrears if parties had agreed on renovations and offsetting

1. The defendant was ordered to pay US$11,700.00 to the plaintiff being outstanding rental arrears. 2. Interest on the sum at the prescribed rate of 5% per annum from date of service of summons to date of payment in full. 3. Costs of suit on a legal practitioner and client scale.

Where a party alleges that an oral agreement was varied through a third party intermediary, that party bears the burden of proving such variation by calling the intermediary as a witness or providing other credible evidence. In the absence of such proof, the original terms of the agreement will be enforced. Work performed ancillary to an agreed installation (such as plumbing work associated with water tank installation) does not constitute separate renovations that can be offset against rental obligations unless expressly agreed. A claim for set-off of alleged renovation costs against rental arrears must be supported by clear evidence of an agreement to offset, failing which the full rental amount remains due and payable.

The court observed that Mr Muhwandi's role was limited to that of a rent collector and friend of the plaintiff, not an agent with authority to vary the terms of the lease agreement. The court noted that some expenditure was incurred on the water tank installation, but this was part of the original agreement and not subject to offset arrangements. The court also implicitly recognized that the Rent Board's eviction order supported the plaintiff's claim regarding the quantum of arrears.

This case illustrates important principles regarding oral lease agreements and the burden of proof in contractual disputes. It emphasizes that parties seeking to rely on variations to oral agreements must produce credible evidence, particularly where such variations involve third parties who allegedly acted as agents. The judgment reinforces the principle that installation work ancillary to an agreed improvement (water tank installation) does not constitute separate renovations giving rise to set-off rights. It also demonstrates the court's approach to claims of offsetting in landlord-tenant relationships where no written agreement or clear evidence exists to support such arrangements.