Six Africans legally owned, with title deeds, a portion of Tweefontein 529. However, their rights were complicated because that ownership was in undivided shares among themselves and a number of Europeans, that is, the property was not divided into specific surveyed portions representing the owner's share. This system meant that the owners could potentially use common areas. After the Europeans owners and the Africans complained about the other group's actions on the farm, the Native Affairs Department (NAD) tried to find a solution which would reduce or end tensions between the two groups, ultimately recommending that the six African owners sell or exchange their property. But, for about 35 years, they resisted any recommendations that threatened ownership of their portion of Tweefontein. They defended their rights, refused to sell their land to the government for insufficient compensation and, until the mid-1950s, refused to move onto land of lesser quality in exchange for their property. They knew their land could not be expropriated merely because their neighbours resented their presence or because government policy deplored Africans and Europeans owning undivided shares of the same farm. Only in 1939 did Parliament pass a law giving the government expropriation power, but Parliament also limited this power by requiring that alternate land be found for expropriated Africans. In general, the law was on the side of the African owners throughout this struggle, and NAD officials accepted that they were bound by the law.

The battle over Tweefontein 529 provides an excellent example of Africans defending their rights and successfully fending off the government for more than a generation. One part of this picture is that NAD officials were forced to negotiate with the six African owners (but, apparently, not with the white owners) and usually (but not always) demonstrated a strong concern for African interests. Threats did not work nor seem to make a difference to the African owners even after the government acquired the authority to expropriate legally owned African land. Ultimately, the heirs of five of the six original owners had to come to terms with the government. Finally, the length of time it took to achieve a final settlement benefited the owners because the state increased the compensation offer several times.