[2016] KEHC 4284 (KLR)
The court found that the respondents had provided false information to the court by claiming that Jediel Njeru Peter was also known as Kaburachi Peter, when in fact they were two distinct individuals. The evidence established that only Kaburachi Peter was allocated the disputed land by the clan and that he died...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 4284 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Beth Gicuku Peter; Respondent: Cecily Wanjiru Kariuki; Respondent: Peter Njagi Njeru
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 140 of 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant
- Outcome
- Application for revocation of grant allowed.
- Legal Topics
- Revocation of Grant, False Information in Succession, Estate Administration, Land Inheritance
- 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
Beth Gicuku Peter
Applicant
Cecily Wanjiru Kariuki
Respondent
Peter Njagi Njeru
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondents gave false information to the court regarding the identity of the deceased for purposes of obtaining a grant.
- 2 Whether the confirmed grant issued in favour of the respondents should be revoked under section 76 of the Law of Succession Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the respondents had provided false information to the court by claiming that Jediel Njeru Peter was also known as Kaburachi Peter, when in fact they were two distinct individuals. The evidence established that only Kaburachi Peter was allocated the disputed land by the clan and that he died without any children or dependants. The respondents' actions in filing the succession cause without the applicant's knowledge and participation, and their failure to attend the hearing despite proper service, further supported the applicant's case. Applying section 76 of the Law of Succession Act, the court held that the grant was obtained fraudulently and should be revoked.
Court Disposition
Application for revocation of grant allowed.
Orders
- The confirmed grant issued in favour of the respondents is hereby revoked.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 140 OF 2006
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KABURACHI PETER (DECEASED
BETH GICUKU PETER................................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
CECILY WANJIRU KARIUKI
PETER NJAGI NJERU ....................................................RESPONDENTS
RULING
Beth Gicuku Peter, the applicant has applied to the court to revoke the confirmed certificate of grant issued in favour of both respondents. According to her the respondents gave false information to the court in stating that Kaburachi Peter and Jediel Njeru Peter referred to one and the same person. It was her evidence that these were two different persons. In her affidavit evidence, she has stated that Kaburachi Peter was born in February 1955 and died at the age of 9 years, while Jediel Njeru Peter was born in 1959 and died at the age of 34 years. It is also her evidence that Kaburachi Peter and Jediel Njeru Peter were her biological sons. And that during the first registration of land her late son Kaburachi Peter was given land reference number Kyeni/Kigumo/1211 by the clan during the adjudication process.
Furthermore, she also testified that Jediel Njeru Peter was then only one year old, when the process of adjudication was going on. Jiedel Peter Njeru was not given any land by the clan. She also testified that Jediel Njeru Peter was never known by an alias name of Kaburachi Peter. More importantly, she stated that the first respondent is the wife of her son Jediel Njeru Peter and the second respondent is the elder son of the first respondent.
She further testified that the two respondents filed this succession cause secretly and without her knowledge and participation. When this cause came up for hearing on 25th November 2015 the trial proceeded ex-parte. I found that the respondents were properly served with the hearing notice. I also found that they had adequate notice of the hearing date. For reasons known to the respondents, they never turned up for the trial of this cause.
In terms of section 76 of the Law of Succession Act (Cap 160) I find that the respondents gave false information that Jediel Njeru Peter was also known as Kaburachi Peter with the sole purpose of defrauding the applicant. I further find that it is only Kaburachi Peter who was the owner of land reference Kyeni/Kigumo/1211 which had been given to him by the clan. I also find as a fact that Kaburachi Peter died without having any child or dependants.
In the circumstances, I find that the applicant has proved her case on a balance of probabilities. And for that reason I hereby revoke the grant issued in favour of the respondents.
As regards costs I make no order in that regard because the parties are members of the same family.
RULING DATED, SIGNEDand DELIVERED in open court at EMBU this 14th day of April 2016
In the presence of Ms Muriuki holding brief for Mr. Ithiga for the Applicant and in the absence of both Respondents.
Court clerk Njue.
J.M. BWONWONGA
JUDGE
14/04/2016