Latest update January 25th, 2025 7:00 AM
Latest News
- Gov’t to add $5.9M in debt to every household by the end of 2025- Shadow Finance Minister
- Speaker blocks Opposition Chief Whip from highlighting allegations of corruption by VP Jagdeo, Ministers, Police Force
- US military aircraft deport migrants as Pentagon readies more troops for border
- Pick-up driver dies in blaze after crash with truck at Bartica
- Police officer, former GRA staff found guilty of computer forgery
Injunction filed again over “controversial” family land
Almost two weeks after a family regained control of land said to be in their possession for over 77 years, another injunction has been filed, preventing them from accessing and conducting businesses activities.
The family says that this second injunction was granted by the said judge, who had earlier discharged the previous one. It again prevents the family from selling, leasing or conducting any other activity at the 13 to 16 Vreed-en-Rust, West Bank Demerera properties.
Family members during picket action in July
The family members who say that the constant court proceedings are hindering the development and progress of their property explained that several thousands of dollars were spent to fence the property since the earlier ruling was made.
The family said that they have also commenced business movements regarding the property and again they have halted. They are therefore contemplating legal action to have the relevant state agencies confirm the ownership of the property in a court.
Earlier in the month, the siblings of the Majors, Robertses, Danielses, Fieldses, Draytons and the Sattaurs had an injunction filed by RMC SILICA, under Mr. Grantley Walrond, discharged.
The family had before that, picketed the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC), causing Minister of Natural Resources and Environment, Robert Persaud, to order that the GGMC issue a Cease Work Order to all parties pending a thorough investigation and satisfactory outcome.
The siblings claimed that the property had been in the family since 1926, but that for the last 20 years the mining company had been imposing itself on the land, claiming to have documentation from the GGMC to conduct sand mining works at the location.
The family claimed also that it was a “clear case of bullyism” since they have all the necessary documents to prove that the property belongs in their family. They said that when they first experienced problems with the mining company the property was in the process of being handed over from parents to children. The matter was in the court since 1993, but they only received official hand over on July 16, last year.
However, the company also presented documentation to the family stating that it had permission to mine on the property, which it claimed is state land. The family’s land title and transport were also disregarded, by the company which claimed that the documents for the more than 800 acre property were forgeries.
In terms of the GGMC, the family during their picket exercise said they were against the agency’s failure to intervene in the land dispute, especially since the mining works were authorized by the entity. They said that the agency refused to investigate the matter even after the mining company started destroying the structures on the land.
The family members say, however, that they have already confirmed from the Lands and Surveys Department and have stated repeatedly that the West Bank Demerara property does not belong to the state and that it is a land registered area. In this light, the family says that it is contemplating obtaining a court order to cause the Lands and Surveys Department to provide the evidence that the land is registered and is owned by the relatives.
The siblings say that they are however stymied by the company’s imposition, and now court activities, since they have plans for the prime location. They noted that since the previous injunction was discharged they have expended almost half a million dollars to fence the property.
It was following this move, they said that the other injunction was filed, while the company has not obeyed the ruling in the previous injunction which states that the mining company is to pay a $25,000 cost to the nine defendants- but has not yet done same.
The matter will head to the Supreme Court on January 21.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Development requires more than oil revenues
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- In one of the most impassioned pleas ever made, an evangelical Bishop Rev. Mariann Edgar... more
OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Weekend Cartoon
