[2015] KEHC 7263 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants, as confirmed administrators of the estate of Kirika Munjuga, had lawfully obtained a grant and had proceeded to subdivide and distribute the estate property, including the suit parcels Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and 845. The respondent, having withdrawn her application for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 7263 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Harrison Munjuga Kirika; Applicant: Johana Ngaruiya Kirika; Respondent: Margaret Nyathira Muiga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 1590 of 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Eviction Application
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Judges
- AO Muchelule, DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Grant of Letters of Administration, Revocation of Grant, Eviction of Occupants, Intermeddling With Estate, Distribution of Estate Property
- 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
Harrison Munjuga Kirika
Applicant
Johana Ngaruiya Kirika
Applicant
Margaret Nyathira Muiga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Eviction Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants, as administrators of the estate, are entitled to exclusive possession of the suit properties.
- 2 Whether the respondent has any legal claim to remain on the suit properties after withdrawing her application for revocation of grant.
- 3 Whether the respondent's continued occupation constitutes intermeddling with the estate.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants, as confirmed administrators of the estate of Kirika Munjuga, had lawfully obtained a grant and had proceeded to subdivide and distribute the estate property, including the suit parcels Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and 845. The respondent, having withdrawn her application for revocation of grant and not having any grant herself, had no legal basis to remain on the properties. Her continued occupation constituted intermeddling with the estate. The court exercised its jurisdiction under the Law of Succession Act and its inherent powers to order the respondent and those acting under her to vacate the properties within 60 days, failing which eviction would be...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- The respondent and those acting under her shall vacate Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and Komothai/Kiambururu/845 within 60 days.
- Failing compliance, the respondent and those acting under her shall be evicted by the court bailiff with the assistance of the County Police Commander, Kiambu.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
MILIMANI LAW COURTS
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 1590 OF 2010
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KIRIKA MUNJUGA (DECEASED)
BETWEEN
HARRISON MUNJUGA KIRIKA................... 1ST APPLICANT
JOHANA NGARUIYA KIRIKA..................... 2ND APPLICANT
VERSUS
MARGARET NYATHIRA MUIGA.................... RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The applicants are the sons of the deceased Kirika Munjuga who died intestate on 14th August 1978. On 8th January 2007 they successfully petitioned for grant of letters of administration in Principal Magistrate Succession Cause no. 3/2007. The grant was confirmed on 14th October 2008.
2. The respondent filed an application on 11th August 2010 seeking the revocation of the grant. She later withdrew the application. She also lodged cautions against the titles in the suit properties which the applicants have applied to have removed.
3. The applicant filed the present motion dated 27th November 2014 seeking the eviction of the respondent, her children, servants, employees and/or agents from parcels Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and Komothai/Kiambururu/845; they be put into possession; and that the orders be enforced by the court bailiff and the police in Kiambu County. The 2nd applicant swore a supporting affidavit to say that the respondent has no claim to the properties, having withdrawn the application for revocation, and that the applicants as the administrators of the estate should be the ones legally entitled to have possession. The application did not elicit any response from the respondent.
4. Section 47 of the Law of Succession Act (Cap 160) confers upon this court the jurisdiction to entertain any application and determine any dispute under the Act and to pronounce such decrees and make such orders as may be expedient. Further, rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules grants the court inherent powers to make such orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the court. Lastly, upon the death of the owner of a property, the law of succession provides for the procedure of obtaining grant to enable an administrator step into the shoes of the deceased owner. It is trite that it is only the person who has a grant who can handle the property of the deceased. Accordingly, any act done to the detriment of the estate by a person who has not obtained a grant amounts to intermeddling. (Gitau and 2 others Vs Wandai and 5 others (1989) KRL 231. )
5. The applicants have a grant and have gone on to sub divide the deceased’s Komothai/Kiambururu/285 and distribute the respective portions. They include Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and Komothai/ Kiambururu / 845. I allow the application and order the respondents, and those acting under her, to vacate from the two parcels Komothai/Kiambururu/844 and Komothai/Kiambururu/845 within 60 days failing which they will be evicted by the court bailiff with the assistance of the County Police Commander, Kiambu and the applicants put into possession. Costs shall be borne by the respondent.
DATED at NAIROBI this 29th day of April 2015
A.O. MUCHELULE
JUDGE
DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 30th day of April 2015
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE