[2013] KEHC 2430 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 2430 (KLR)

The court found that since all beneficiaries are adults, there is no justification for holding any portion of the estate in trust. The evidence established that the deceased had already apportioned certain shares inter vivos, including one acre to Elikana Gathigi Wachira and one acre for the homestead to be...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 2430 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: Apollo Karimi Muiga; Petitioner: Arthur Wambugu Muiga; Objector: Wangechi King'ori & Others; Protestor: Beatrice Muthoni Gathima; Protestor: Purity Mukami Gathima; Protestor: Andrew Muiga Gathima; Protestor: Edward Ndiritu Gathima; Protestor: Gilbert Gathigi Gathima; Protestor: Stanley Mugo Muiga
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nyeri
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 40 of 1990
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Grant confirmed as proposed by the 2nd Protestor. Each party to bear their own costs.
Legal Topics
Succession, Distribution of Estate, Confirmation of Grant, Intestate Estate, Trusts in Succession, Beneficiary Entitlements
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Distribution of Estate Confirmation of Grant Intestate Estate Trusts in Succession Beneficiary Entitlements

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apollo Karimi Muiga

Petitioner

Arthur Wambugu Muiga

Petitioner

Wangechi King'ori & Others

Objector

Beatrice Muthoni Gathima

Protestor

Purity Mukami Gathima

Protestor

Andrew Muiga Gathima

Protestor

Edward Ndiritu Gathima

Protestor

Gilbert Gathigi Gathima

Protestor

Stanley Mugo Muiga

Protestor

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the estate of the deceased should be distributed as proposed by the petitioners or as per the protestors' proposals.
  2. 2 Whether any portion of the estate should be held in trust for beneficiaries or distributed directly to adult beneficiaries.
  3. 3 How to equitably distribute land parcel L.R. No. Mahiga/Munyange/65 and Plot No. 20 Ndunyu Market among the beneficiaries.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that since all beneficiaries are adults, there is no justification for holding any portion of the estate in trust. The evidence established that the deceased had already apportioned certain shares inter vivos, including one acre to Elikana Gathigi Wachira and one acre for the homestead to be available for unmarried daughters. The remaining 10 acres of L.R. No. Mahiga/Munyange/65 should be shared equally between the two houses of the deceased, with each house's share further subdivided among its members. The widows of deceased sons are to succeed their husbands' shares. Plot No. 20 Ndunyu Market and any compensation for land lost to road construction are to be sold or...

Court Disposition

Grant confirmed as proposed by the 2nd Protestor. Each party to bear their own costs.

Orders

  • The grant of letters of administration intestate is confirmed as per the 2nd Protestor's proposal.
  • L.R. No. Mahiga/Munyange/65: 2 acres to be excised (1 acre to Elikana Gathigi Wachira, 1 acre for the homestead for unmarried daughters), balance of 10 acres to be shared equally between the two houses.