[2016] KEHC 2071 (KLR)
The court found that the surveyor's report had identified all beneficiaries and their respective shares, including the objector. The objector's opposition was not supported by any viable legal grounds, as evidence showed he had already sold his entire share and thus had no remaining interest in the estate. The court...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 2071 (KLR)
- Parties
- Respondent: Francis Masete Maunda; Applicant: Vincent Wekesa Maunda; Interested Party: Joseph Wafula Maunda
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Bungoma
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Probate & Administration 166 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Probate and Administration Cause / Ruling on Application for Confirmation of Grant
- Outcome
- Objection dismissed; grant confirmed as per surveyor's report.
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Beneficiary Rights
- 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
Francis Masete Maunda
Respondent
Vincent Wekesa Maunda
Applicant
Joseph Wafula Maunda
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration Cause / Ruling on Application for Confirmation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant of representation in respect of the estate of the late Alumasi Maunda Wakongoba should be confirmed based on the surveyor's report and elders' findings.
- 2 Whether the objector, Vincent Wekesa Maunda, has a valid objection to the confirmation of the grant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the surveyor's report had identified all beneficiaries and their respective shares, including the objector. The objector's opposition was not supported by any viable legal grounds, as evidence showed he had already sold his entire share and thus had no remaining interest in the estate. The court emphasized the need to bring the matter to a close, given the long delay since the deceased's death and the prior direction to identify shares before confirmation. Accordingly, the objection was dismissed and the grant was confirmed based on the surveyor's report.
Court Disposition
Objection dismissed; grant confirmed as per surveyor's report.
Orders
- The objection by Vincent Wekesa Maunda is dismissed.
- The grant of representation is confirmed based on the surveyor's report.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
45 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT BUNGOMA
PROBATE & ADMINISTRATION CAUSE NO. 166 OF 1998
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE ALUMASI MAUNDA WAKONGOBA
FRANCIS MASETE MAUNDA…………....... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
VERSUS
VINCENT WEKESA MAUNDA ……………....... OBJECTOR/APPLICANT
AND
JOSEPH WAFULA MAUNDA ……………......….… INTERESTED PARTY
RULING
1. The application before court is dated 27th October, 2015 seeking to have the cause confirmed, based on the elder’s findings and the surveyors report.
2. The application is grounded on the grounds that;
i. Neither the objector nor the petitioner have moved the court since the annulment of the earlier grant on 13th June, 2000,
ii. The surveyors report of 10th November 2000 ascertained the share of each beneficiary.
iii. The petitioner is 90 years and ailing. Whereas the applicant is 85 years and desirous of bringing the matter to a closure.
3. In the supporting affidavit the applicant states that as at the time of his death the deceased had identified for each beneficiary their portions and two of his children who were then under age had their shares held by their respective mothers.
4. The application has been supported by the following beneficiaries namely
i. Moses Wafula Juma (grandson)
ii. Francis Masita Maunda (son)
iii. Martin Shikuku Maunda
iv. George Wekesa (grandson)
v. Francis Masete Maunda (son)
5. There were also witnesses who confirmed that the deceased did distribute the estate. The same are’
i. Ayub Makipisi Riperi
ii. Jackson Makokha Kimingisi
6. The objector is the only one opposed to the confirmation in terms of the surveyors report. His initial objection was because he had not been involved in the succession proceedings; he had not been given his share and he then lived with his mother.
7. In revoking the grant Mbito J, observed that the grant ought not to have been confirmed in the first instance as individual shares had not been identified. He directed the administration to identify shares and thereafter apply for confirmation.
8. I have considered the evidence on record, affidavit for and against confirmation based on the surveyor’s report and take cognisant of the fact that the surveyors report identified 11 beneficiaries including the objector and it gives details of those who have derived title from the said beneficiaries either by inheriting or purchasing. The identified beneficiaries are;
1. Francis Masete
2. Joseph Wafula
3. Vincent Maruti
4. Geoffrey Wanjala
5. Martin Sikuku
6. Teresa Naliaka
7. Salim Juma (deceased)
8. Isaac Masurutys
9. James Wekesa (deceased)
10. Vincent Wekesa &
11. Wanyonyi Masinde.
9. The deceased died in 1980 that is 36 years ago and parties are yet to obtain title. At the point of revoking the grant the court on the 13th of June, 2000 – 16 years ago directed identification of shares.
10. It is high time that this matter was settled. I do not find any viable objection by the objector while the grant should not be confirmed. He complains of third parties disputed to the beneficiaries. In any event from the evidence on record he has sold his entire share and has absolutely no interest in the estate.
11. For the reasons above the objection is dismissed. I confirm the grant based on the surveyors report. Costs to be in the cause.
DATED and DELIVERED at BUNGOMA this 10th November, 2016
ALI-ARONI
JUDGE.