[2010] KEHC 1823 (KLR)
The court found that the only parcel of land forming the estate should be distributed among the two sons and the grandson, J M, each receiving one acre, as J M was living on the land and is a direct descendant. The court rejected the inclusion of a fifth daughter, as only four daughters were identified by the chief...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 1823 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: G N M’Igweta; Respondent: S N I
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 233 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Estate distributed among two sons and one grandson; widow receives life interest in the balance; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Intestate Succession, Distribution of Estate, Rights of Grandchildren, Married Daughters Exclusion
- 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
G N M’Igweta
Applicant
S N I
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether grandchildren of the deceased are entitled to a share of the estate under intestate succession.
- 2 Whether married daughters of the deceased are entitled to a share of the estate when they did not lay claim.
- 3 How the only parcel of land belonging to the estate should be distributed among the beneficiaries.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the only parcel of land forming the estate should be distributed among the two sons and the grandson, J M, each receiving one acre, as J M was living on the land and is a direct descendant. The court rejected the inclusion of a fifth daughter, as only four daughters were identified by the chief and none had come forward to claim a share. The balance of the land was to be held by the widow, G N M’Igweta, for her lifetime, and thereafter to be shared equally among the two sons and the grandson. The court reasoned that since the daughters were married, living at their matrimonial homes, and had not claimed any part of the estate, they would not be considered in the...
Court Disposition
Estate distributed among two sons and one grandson; widow receives life interest in the balance; no order as to costs.
Orders
- S N to receive 1 acre of the parcel.
- G K to receive 1 acre of the parcel.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE 233 OF 2002
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF I B alias M B (DECEASED)
G N I ................................... PETITIONER
VERSUS
SN I ................................ OBJECTOR
JUDGMENT
The widow of the deceased G N M’Igweta petitioned for grant of letters of administration intestate.She set out in that petition the names of the children of the deceased and in that list included J M and J G grandchildren of the deceased.An objection was raised by S N, a son of the deceased and when the matter came before court, an order was made on 19th December 2005 appointing both G and S as joint administrators of this estate.The two administrators have been unable to agree on the mode of distribution of the only one parcel of land belonging to this estate namely [particulars withheld].G has filed an affidavit proposing her mode of distribution and similarly S has done the same.When the matter came before me on 3rd June 2010, I was satisfied that I would be able to order distribution from the facts contained in those affidavits.I however posed a question to G inquiring whether J M, a grandson of the deceased was living on the land.An answer came from the advocate representing G to the effect that he is a son of one of the daughters of G.G also stated that J M is married and lives on that property with his family.Her advocate stated that the daughters of the deceased were all married and were all living at their matrimonial homes.In the proposed distribution of G, she has allocated one acre each to the two sons of the deceased and to the grandson J M.She has further proposed that she holds for her lifetime 1. 94 acres of that land which would thereafter be shared equally amongst the 4 daughters.Samson on his part shared out 1. 85 acres to himself and his other brother to the exclusion of the grandson.He thereafter proposed that Gladys would get 1 ¼ acres for her lifetime and thereafter to be shared equally amongst what he calls 5 daughters.It is noted that S has identified 5 daughters of the deceased whereas Gladys only mentioned 4. Similarly, the letter of the chief dated 26th July 2002 only identified 4 daughters of the deceased who are married.The inclusion of the 5th daughter by S for that reason is rejected by this court.Since the daughters are married and living at their matrimonial home and because they did not come to court to claim part of deceased estate, I will not consider them in the distribution.In the judgment of this court, parcel number [particulars withheld] shall be distributed as follows:-
a.S N - 1 acre
b.G K – 1 acre
c.J M – 1 acre
d.The balance shall go to G N M’I for her lifetime and thereafter shall be shared equally by S N, G K and J M.
e.There shall be no orders as to costs.
Dated and delivered at Meru this 2nd day of July 2010.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE