[2009] KEHC 889 (KLR)
The court found that the respondent had refused to sign the necessary documents to effect the equal distribution of L.R. Konyu/Baricho/91 as provided in the certificate of confirmation of grant. The respondent had not applied for revocation or alteration of the grant, and the certificate remained valid and binding....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 889 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Annah Wamuyu Muhingo; Respondent: Joseph Muriuki Muhingo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Succession Cause 112 of 1989
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Execution of Confirmed Grant
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates, Confirmation of Grant, Land Transfer, Probate and Administration, Distribution of Property
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Annah Wamuyu Muhingo
Applicant
Joseph Muriuki Muhingo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Execution of Confirmed Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should authorize its Deputy Registrar to sign documents for subdivision and transfer of land parcel KONYU/BARICHO/91 in place of the respondent.
- 2 Whether the production of the original title deed should be dispensed with at the time of transfer.
- 3 Whether the applicant is entitled to half of L.R. Konyu/Baricho/91 as per the certificate of confirmation of grant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondent had refused to sign the necessary documents to effect the equal distribution of L.R. Konyu/Baricho/91 as provided in the certificate of confirmation of grant. The respondent had not applied for revocation or alteration of the grant, and the certificate remained valid and binding. The applicant was therefore entitled to seek the court's intervention. Exercising its inherent powers under Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules, the court granted the orders sought, authorizing the Deputy Registrar to sign the necessary documents for subdivision and transfer in place of the respondent and dispensing with the production of the original title deed at...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The Deputy Registrar/officer of the court is authorized to sign all necessary documents of subdivision and transfer of land parcel KONYU/BARICHO/91 in place of the respondent.
- Production of the original title deed in respect of land parcel KONYU/BARICHO/91 is dispensed with at the time of transfer.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
Succession Cause 112 of 1989
ESTATE OF GAICHUHIA MUHINGO - DECEASED
ANNAH WAMUYU MUHINGO ………………APPLICANT
VERSUS
JOSEPH MURIUKI MUHINGO…………..RESPONDENT
RULING
Pursuant to the Provisions of Section 71 (1) and (3) of the Law of Succession the grant of Letter of Administration Intestate of the Estate of Gaichuhia Muhingo, deceased issued to Annah Wamuyu Muhingo and Joseph Muriuki Muhingo (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant & Respondent respectively) was confirmed on 22nd April 2009. The certificate of confirmation indicated that L.R. No. Konyu/Baricho/91 would be shared equally.
Annah Wamuyu Muhingo is now before this court seeking for the following orders in the summons dated 7th May 2009:
1. That the Honourable Court be pleased to order and/or authorize its Deputy Registrar/officer to sign all the necessary documents of sub-divisions and transfer of land parcel No. KONYU/BARICHO/91 instead of the Respondent herein JOSEPH MURIUKI MUHINGO.
2. That the production of the original title Deed in respect of Land Parcel No. KONYU/BARICHO/91 be dispensed with at the time of transfer herein.
The Summons is supported by the affidavit sworn on 7th May 2009. Joseph Muriuki Muhingo opposed the application by filing a replying affidavit he swore on 2nd September 2009.
It is the submission of the applicant that the Respondent has refused to have the terms of the certificate of confirmation of grant executed. The Respondent on his part denied having been to this court. He alleged that the Applicant has not served him with any documents save for the current application. The Respondent claimed that the Applicant was only entitled to only 0. 53 hectares and not half of L.R. No. Konyu/Baricho/91. He denied having refused to sign the necessary documents.
I have carefully considered the grounds set out on the face of the summons plus the facts deponed in the affidavits for and against the application. It is obvious that the Respondent has refused to sign the necessary documents to have half of L.R. Konyu/Baricho/91 transferred to the Applicant. He has annexed to his replying affidavit documents showing that the Respondent is only entitled to L.R. Konyu/Baricho/91 yet the certificate of confirmation of grant indicates that the applicant and the Respondent should share equally the aforesaid parcel of land. The Respondent has not applied for the grant to be revoked and or altered.
I am convinced the applicant was entitled to bring up these proceedings. In exercise of this court’s inherent power under Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules I hereby grant the applicant the orders sought in the summons dated 7th May 2009. Costs of the application to be met by the estate.
Dated and delivered this 13th day of October 2009.
J.K. SERGON
JUDGE
In open court in the presence of the applicant and the Respondent.
J.K. SERGON
JUDGE