Court labels milk producer fraudster
Monkagedi Gaothobogwe | Wednesday October 22, 2014 17:10
Sigwele, the promoter of the first citizen milk company Delta Dairies, had filed opposing papers before the High Court trying to stop the liquidation of the milk company he founded in 2007.
In the document filed before the High Court Sigwele claimed a meeting of the Board of directors had given him the power of attorney to represent the company and to oppose the liquidation in court.
Justice Rannowane in his ruling said the purported meeting was “outright suspicious and one would be forgiven for viewing it as attempted fraud on the company”.
Justice Rannowane further shamed Sigwele when he revealed that while the company has six board of directors (Lesego Selotate, Junine Writ, John O’Reilly, Howard Sigwele, Heman De Lange and Mr Kapinga), it appears the purported meeting was attended by only one director, namely Dr Howard Sigwele, who authorised himself to sign power of attorney authorising Kiggundu attorneys to institute proceedings to oppose the liquidation.
As if to add insult to injury Sigwele’s lawyer also distanced herself from the matter when she told the court that she did not persist in purporting to lawfully act for Sigwele, but rather described herself as a friend of the court. The judge did not spare plant technician Tirelo Danga either, who tried to have the liquidation case removed from the courts alleging that Dr Sigwele promised him money.
Danga is the employee whose affidavit was earlier this year used at the Industrial Court to put the milk company under the hammer. However, after applying for liquidation, he would later make a u-turn and tell the court that he was revoking the liquidation application.
“This inconsistent and erratic conduct on his part reflects poorly on his credibility and calls into question whether he has the interest of the company at heart, or was merely motivated by self-interest, which he seems to place above the interest of all the other creditors in this matter.”
“By the look of things one would be forgiven for believing that in the next few days the petitioner is likely to file more affidavits either for or against the petition ad infinitum. Such a situation cannot be countenanced,” said judge Rannowane.
The judge also said it has since come to light from the provisional liquidator that the respondent’s company has no cash whatsoever. Its premises were abandoned and dirty.