E. Carolus J

[1] In terms of MC 114/2020 ("the Principal Petition") the petitioner Tatiana Joyceline Pharla
(formerly Vidot) seeks the division in kind of parcel C6455 of which she and the
respondents to the petition are the registered co-owners.

[2] Marie Antoinette Belle and Marie Julie Marlene Vidot filed a Notice of Motion (MA
7112021) to intervene in MC 114/2020 against Tatiana Joyceline Pharla (formerly Vidot)
as the 15t respondent and the respondents to the Principal Petition as the 2nd to 11th
respondents.

[3] In terms of its ruling of 20th December 2021, the Court found that the motion for
intervention was not proper, as such procedure was intended to be used only in matters
commenced by way of a plaint, whereas it was being used intervene in a matter commenced
by Petition (for division in kind).

[4] The Court however found that "in terms of section 112 of the SCCP, ... the 2nd applicant
Marie Julie Marlene Vidot and the other heirs of the deceased namely Marie Yvon Maxime
Vidot, Petrina Marlene Belle, Don Dean Belle, Dina Doreen Belle and Bertine Louise
Belle, who are entitled to a share of parcel C6455, ought to have been joined as
respondents to the Principal Petition and that their presence is necessary in order for the
court to decide on the said Petition effectively and completely". The Court went to add that
"before this is done they will need to be registered as co-owners of parcel C6455 and must
make the necessary application in that regard". Emphasis added.

[5] The Court held in relevant part, as follows:

(35) Accordingly, I hold that Marie Julie Marlene Vidot, Marie Yvon Maxime Vidot,
Petrina Marlene Belle, Don Dean Belle, Dina Doreen Belle and Bertine Louise
Belle, should be joined as respondents to the Principal Petition.

(36) However, they must first be registered as co-owners of parcel C6455, and must
make the necessary application in that regard forthwith. The Court will not
condone any unnecessary delay in doing so.

(37) Once they are registered as co-owners of parcel C6455, the 1st 
respondent/Petitioner in the Principal Petition for division in kind in MC 114/2020
shall amend the Petition to add them as respondents thereto, and serve them and
the original respondents with the amended Petition with summons.

(38) The Principal Petition is stayed until such time as the above is complied with.

Emphasis added.

[6] To date Marie Julie Marlene Vidot, Marie Yvon Maxime Vidot, Petrina Marlene Belle,
Don Dean Belle, Dina Doreen Belle and Bertine Louise Belle, have not been registered as
co-owners of parcel C6455. Mr. Elisabeth who was counsel for Marie Antoinette Belle and
Marie Julie Marlene Vidot in the motion has stated that the Land Registrar has stated that
she cannot do so on the basis of this Court's ruling of 20th December 2021 as there was no
order directing her to do so. In addition she cannot register the aforementioned persons as
co-owners of parcel C6455 by way of an affidavit on transmission by death unless such
affidavit is signed by all co-owners.

[7] This Court's ruling of 20th December 2021 at para 36 clearly states that in order to be
registered as co-owners of parcel C6455, Marie Julie Marlene Vidot, Marie Yvon Maxime
Vidot, Petrina Marlene Belle, Don Dean Belle, Dina Doreen Belle and Bertine Louise Belle
must make the necessary application in that regard. The Court's ruling only establishes
that as heirs of the deceased they are entitled to a share of parcel C6455 and therefore have
a right to be so registered, but the prescribed procedure must be followed before the Land
Registrar can do so.

[8] In the circumstances, I hold that the prescribed procedure must be followed for the
registration of the aforementioned persons as co-owners. If they feel that the Land Registrar
is unlawfully refusing to effect such registration, they can make the necessary application
to the Court to resolve the matter.

Signed, dated and delivered at Ile du Port on 17th February 2023.

E. Carolus J