[2023] KEHC 3029 (KLR)

[2023] KEHC 3029 (KLR)

The court found that the protestor failed to prove that his father purchased an additional 2 acres of the estate property from the deceased. The sale agreements produced by the protestor did not specify the parcel of land allegedly sold, and the signatures were disputed as forgeries. The only sale acknowledged by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] KEHC 3029 (KLR)
Parties
Protestor: Kithinji M’ikiara; Petitioner: Kenneth Mworia Bundi; Interested Party: Kendi Bundi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 577 of 2013
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Protest dismissed; grant confirmed as per beneficiaries' agreement; estate distributed accordingly.
Judges
EM Muriithi
Legal Topics
Succession and Distribution, Intestate Estate, Beneficiary Entitlement, Land Sale Disputes
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Succession and Distribution Intestate Estate Beneficiary Entitlement Land Sale Disputes

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kithinji M’ikiara

Protestor

Kenneth Mworia Bundi

Petitioner

Kendi Bundi

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the protestor's father purchased an additional 2 acres of the estate property from the deceased and is entitled to it.
  2. 2 Whether the protestor is entitled to a share of the estate or a refund of the alleged purchase price.
  3. 3 How the estate property should be distributed among the beneficiaries.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the protestor failed to prove that his father purchased an additional 2 acres of the estate property from the deceased. The sale agreements produced by the protestor did not specify the parcel of land allegedly sold, and the signatures were disputed as forgeries. The only sale acknowledged by the deceased's family and supported by evidence was for 2 acres (parcel No 1236), which had already been transferred to the protestor's father. The protestor was not a beneficiary of the deceased and had no further claim to the estate. The court accepted the family’s unanimous agreement on distribution, as evidenced by the consent of all seven beneficiaries. Accordingly, the...

Court Disposition

Protest dismissed; grant confirmed as per beneficiaries' agreement; estate distributed accordingly.

Orders

  • The protest dated June 26, 2020 is dismissed.
  • The grant issued to the Interested Party is confirmed in terms of paragraph 10 of her affidavit sworn on May 12, 2020.