[2017] KEHC 1878 (KLR)
The court determined that, due to the possibility of estate property having been disposed of after confirmation of grant and the fact that parties were unrepresented and may not have presented all relevant evidence, it is necessary to call additional witnesses to clarify the circumstances of the estate's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 1878 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Gilbert Kithuci Mucheke; Respondent: Daina Mukwanjeru Mucheke
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 284 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Interlocutory Ruling
- Outcome
- Further evidence ordered before final determination.
- Judges
- A Mabeya
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Estate Distribution, Confirmation of Grant
- 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
Gilbert Kithuci Mucheke
Applicant
Daina Mukwanjeru Mucheke
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Interlocutory Ruling
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the administrator distributed the estate in accordance with the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant.
- 2 Whether the sale of estate property to third parties was lawful and binding on all beneficiaries.
- 3 Whether further evidence is necessary to reach a just and fair conclusion regarding the objection.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that, due to the possibility of estate property having been disposed of after confirmation of grant and the fact that parties were unrepresented and may not have presented all relevant evidence, it is necessary to call additional witnesses to clarify the circumstances of the estate's distribution and any sales to third parties. The court invoked its powers under Article 159 of the Constitution and Section 93 of the Law of Succession Act to ensure a fair and just resolution of the objection before making a final determination.
Court Disposition
Further evidence ordered before final determination.
Orders
- Summons to issue to Ashford Kariuki and Michael Kirimi Ndubi to appear in court to provide further evidence.
- Matter set for hearing on 19/3/2018.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
18 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 284 OF 2009
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MUCHEKE KITHAMBA IRUMI (DECEASED)
GILBERT KITHUCI MUCHEKE ………….………….…..PETITIONER
Versus
DAINA MUKWANJERU MUCHEKE …………………RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
Having reserved the Judgment for delivery o 9th November, 2017, I have now thoroughly but carefully considered the record. I note the foregoing:-
(a) there is an allegation that after confirmation, the administrator distributed the entire estate in terms of the Certificate of Confirmation dated 10/2/2005.
(b) that the estate property was divided into four titles. That the titles belonging to the Objector and Ashford Kariuki are already sold to a third party. There are sale agreements on record.
(c) although at the trial the Objector denied the agreement, I have seen an Affidavit on record in which she has sworn otherwise.
(d) since the parties were unrepresented, it would seem that not all the evidence was tendered by them to enable the Court reach a just and fair conclusion.
(e) being aware of the provisions of section 93 of the Law of Succession Act, and seeing that there may have been dispositions of the state after confirmation, and for the interests of justice, I call for more evidence under Articles 159 of the Constitution of Kenya.
(f) Accordingly, summons to issue to Ashford Kariuki, a beneficiary and one Michael Kirimi Ndubi of P. O. Box 183, Nanyuki to appear in Court to enlighten the court further. Any decision that this Court will make on the objection will in one way or the other affect these two. For hearing on 19/3/2018.
DATED, and DELIVERED at Meru this 23rd day of October, 2017.
A. MABEYA
JUDGE