The applicants represented by Mr. Gerald Mlotshwa said the move was to enable the parties to resolve the matter amicably with the major shareholders.
However the presiding judge, Justice Chinembiri Bhunu reserved his decision on costs.
The Savanhu chaired board had sought intervention from the high court seeking to determine the legality of a proposed Annual General Meeting which wanted to vote in a new board.
However, the meeting was held but shareholders argued that the meeting was a shareholdersâ€™ meeting not an AGM.
The meeting voted in a new board to replace the Savanhu-led one. Mr Savanhu argues that the meeting was null and void.