https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/11615

In re Estate of Ego (Deceased) (Succession Cause 116 of 2000) [2026] KEHC 11615 (KLR) (28 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 11615 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Eldoret Succession Cause 116 of 2000 AK Ndung'u, J July 28, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE CHEMASE EGO (DECEASED) In the matter of Mary Mokicho Kipkemoi Applicant Ruling 1.Before Court is a Notice of Motion expressed to be brought under Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya 2010, Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act, Rule 73 of Probate and Administration Rules. The Applicant is seeking for orders that:a.Spent.b.That the Court issues an order directing the County Land Surveyor of Elgeyo Marakwet to carry out the subdivision of land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 according to the Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant issued on 1st August 2022.c.Further that a directive for the Officer Commanding Station (OCS) of Iten Police Station to provide adequate security during the exercised.That costs of the application be in the cause. 2.The application is anchored on grounds that the Court confirmed the Grant of Letters of Administration for the deceased’s estate on 19th April 2021, which was followed by a Certificate of Confirmation on 26th May 2021 and a subsequent amendment on 1st August 2022. She stated there is a pressing need to subdivide land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 to facilitate distribution among beneficiaries; however, this process has been obstructed by a history of hostility and blatant disobedience from certain beneficiaries toward the court's confirmation orders. Consequently, the Applicant asserted it is necessary for this Court to issue orders directing the County Land Surveyor of Elgeyo Marakwet to carry out the subdivision and the Officer Commanding Station (OCS) of Iten Police Station to provide adequate security during the exercise. She further maintained that the application is brought timely, in good faith, and in the best interests of justice, ensuring the estate is fully administered without causing prejudice to any party. 3.In her supporting affidavit, the Applicant/Administrator Mary Mokicho Kipkemoi deposes that following the Court's confirmation of the Grant of Letters of Administration on 19th April 2021, and the issuance of an Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant on 1st August 2022, there is a pressing need to subdivide land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 for distribution among the beneficiaries. She highlights that previous attempts to carry out this subdivision, specifically on 5th October 2021, were unsuccessful due to hostility and blatant resistance from certain beneficiaries, which she asserts is in direct disobedience of the Court's previous confirmation orders. Consequently, the Applicant requests that the Court issue orders directing the County Land Surveyor of Elgeyo Marakwet to perform the subdivision and the Officer Commanding Station (OCS) of Iten Police Station to provide the necessary security to ensure the exercise can be completed safely. Finally, she maintains that these orders are essential for the full and lawful administration of the estate, will not cause prejudice as they benefit all beneficiaries, and that the application is brought timely and in the best interest of justice. 4.I have considered the Notice of Motion, the supporting affidavit and the record of the Court. The application is unopposed. The issue falling for determination is whether this Court should issue orders directing the County Land Surveyor to undertake the subdivision of land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 in accordance with the Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant and whether police security should be provided during the exercise. 5.The jurisdiction of this Court in succession matters is donated by Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act, which confers upon the High Court jurisdiction to entertain any application and determine any dispute under the Act and to pronounce such decrees and make such orders as may be expedient. That jurisdiction is complemented by Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules, which preserves the inherent power of the Court to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Court. 6.It is now well settled that the inherent jurisdiction preserved under Rule 73 is intended to enable the succession court to give practical effect to its orders and to ensure that the administration of estates is concluded without undue obstruction. The Court is therefore not confined to making declaratory orders but may issue all consequential and ancillary directions necessary to facilitate implementation of a confirmed grant and bring administration of the estate to its lawful conclusion. 7.A certificate of confirmation of grant is not merely declaratory. It is the legal instrument through which the Court authorizes the distribution of the estate in the manner specified therein. Once a grant has been confirmed, the personal representatives are under a statutory obligation to complete the administration of the estate by transferring and distributing the assets to the beneficiaries in accordance with the confirmed grant. Any conduct that obstructs or frustrates the implementation of the confirmed grant amounts to interference with the due administration of the estate and undermines the authority of the Court. 8.In In re Estate of G.K.K. (Deceased) [2017] eKLR, the High Court observed that the purpose of confirmation of a grant is to facilitate transmission of the estate to the rightful beneficiaries and that the Court retains jurisdiction to issue such consequential orders as may be necessary to ensure that distribution is effected in accordance with the confirmed grant. Likewise, in In re Estate of Mwaura Mutungi alias Mwaura Gichina (Dec. [2015] eKLR, the Court held that the probate court possesses sufficient jurisdiction under Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules to make all orders necessary for the proper administration and completion of succession proceedings. 9.The Applicant has deponed, without contradiction, that previous attempts to undertake the subdivision of land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 were frustrated by hostility and resistance from some beneficiaries. Those depositions have not been challenged by any replying affidavit or grounds of opposition and therefore remain uncontroverted. Where evidence placed before the Court is uncontroverted and is credible, the Court is entitled to rely upon it in determining the application. 10.This Court cannot permit its duly issued orders to remain incapable of implementation through acts of obstruction or intimidation by any beneficiary. Courts possess an inherent obligation to ensure that their judgments and orders are not rendered nugatory. The rule of law demands that orders of the Court be obeyed unless and until they are set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction. The provision of police security during the implementation of lawful court orders does not determine proprietary rights afresh nor confer any advantage upon one party over another. Rather, it serves the legitimate purpose of maintaining peace, preserving public order and enabling lawful execution of the Court's orders. 11.The request for the County Land Surveyor to undertake the subdivision is equally well founded. Survey and subdivision are technical exercises that require the expertise of the relevant public officers. Directing the County Land Surveyor to implement the subdivision strictly in accordance with the Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant merely facilitates compliance with the Court's existing orders and does not vary the mode of distribution already sanctioned by the Court. 12.I am therefore satisfied that the orders sought are not intended to reopen the succession dispute or alter the confirmed mode of distribution. Rather, they are consequential orders necessary to give full effect to the Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant issued on 1st August 2022 and to enable the administrators to discharge their statutory duty of completing the administration of the estate. The Court is consequently persuaded that the intervention sought falls squarely within its jurisdiction under Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules and is necessary for the ends of justice. Accordingly, the application is merited and ought to be allowed. 13.With the result that the application dated 14th March 2025 is allowed I make the following orders;a.An order be and is hereby issued directing the County Land Surveyor of Elgeyo Marakwet to carry out the subdivision of land parcel Irongo/Iten/165 according to the Amended Certificate of Confirmation of Grant issued on 1st August 2022.b.An order be and is hereby issued directing the Officer Commanding Station (OCS) of Iten Police Station to provide adequate security during the exercisec.Costs be in the cause. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 28TH DAY OF JULY 2026.A.K. NDUNG’UJUDGE