[2016] KEHC 680 (KLR)

[2016] KEHC 680 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant had established that the grant was obtained by the petitioner through concealment of material facts, including the omission of other beneficiaries and undisclosed assets. The petitioner also failed to respond to the application or provide any justification for his actions, and did...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] KEHC 680 (KLR)
Parties
Petitioner: Charles Michira Mogoi; Objector: Paurina Nyaboke Mogoi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisii
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 126 of 2006
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant
Outcome
application for revocation of grant allowed; grant revoked; fresh grant issued jointly; suit land parcels to revert to deceased's name; parties to bear own costs.
Judges
WA Okwany
Legal Topics
Revocation of Grant, Non Disclosure of Beneficiaries, Priority of Administration, Estate Administration, Land Distribution
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Revocation of Grant Non Disclosure of Beneficiaries Priority of Administration Estate Administration Land Distribution

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Michira Mogoi

Petitioner

Paurina Nyaboke Mogoi

Objector

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant

  1. 1 Whether the grant was obtained fraudulently by concealment of material facts or false statements.
  2. 2 Whether the petitioner failed to diligently administer the estate and disclose all beneficiaries and assets.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant/objector has a higher priority in administration of the estate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant had established that the grant was obtained by the petitioner through concealment of material facts, including the omission of other beneficiaries and undisclosed assets. The petitioner also failed to respond to the application or provide any justification for his actions, and did not diligently administer the estate as required by law. The court held that these failures warranted revocation of the grant under Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. The court further ordered that a fresh grant be issued in the joint names of the petitioner and the objector, and that all the suit land parcels revert to the name of the deceased pending proper distribution...

Court Disposition

application for revocation of grant allowed; grant revoked; fresh grant issued jointly; suit land parcels to revert to deceased's name; parties to bear own costs.

Orders

  • The grant issued to the petitioner on 22nd September 2006 and confirmed on 4th July 2008 is revoked.
  • A fresh grant is issued in the joint names of the petitioner and the applicant/objector.