[2018] KEHC 4433 (KLR)
The court found that there was concealment of material facts regarding the true composition of the estate, specifically the omission of NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836 from the distribution. The evidence, including a letter from the Chief and the applicant's submissions, established that the deceased owned two properties. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 4433 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Henry M’Mithea M’Ikiamba; Applicant: Joseph Mwambi M’Ikiamba
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 122 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation or Annulment of Grant
- Outcome
- grant revoked; prohibition orders issued; directions for appointment of administrators
- Judges
- F Gikonyo
- Legal Topics
- Revocation of Grant, Concealment of Material Facts, Estate Distribution, Probate and Administration
- 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
Henry M’Mithea M’Ikiamba
Petitioner
Joseph Mwambi M’Ikiamba
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation or Annulment of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant issued on 23rd September 2010 should be revoked due to concealment of material facts regarding the estate properties.
- 2 Whether the estate of the deceased comprises two properties, NJIA/BURIERU/1585 and NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836, and if both should be included in the distribution.
- 3 Whether the petitioner failed to diligently distribute the estate in accordance with the confirmed grant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was concealment of material facts regarding the true composition of the estate, specifically the omission of NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836 from the distribution. The evidence, including a letter from the Chief and the applicant's submissions, established that the deceased owned two properties. The petitioner's failure to include both properties in the estate and the lack of transparency in the administration process met the legal threshold for revocation of the grant under section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. The court emphasized the necessity of ascertaining the full extent of the estate before distribution and ordered the revocation of the grant issued on 23rd...
Court Disposition
grant revoked; prohibition orders issued; directions for appointment of administrators
Orders
- The grant made on 23rd September 2010 to the petitioner is revoked.
- Prohibition orders are to be registered on NJIA/BURIERU/1585 and NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836 to preserve the properties.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
34 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 122 OF 2004
In the Matter of the Estate of IkiambaKarithu (Deceased)
HENRY M’MITHEA M’IKIAMBA......................PETITIONER
-Versus-
JOSEPH MWAMBI M’IKIAMBA........................APPLICANT
RULING
[1] I have before me Summons for Revocation or Annulment of Grant issued made on 23rd September 2010 to the Petitioner herein. The application is dated 5thMay 2014 and is expressed to be brought under section 76(d) of the Law of Succession Act and rule 44(2) of the Probate and Administration Rules.
[2] The application is premised upon grounds set out in the application, the affidavit of the Applicant and the submissions filedherein. The major reason given by the Applicant is that since the grant was made on 23. 9.2010, the petitioner has failed to diligently distribute the estate in accordance with the confirmed grant. Instead, the petitioner has registered the estate into his name and now intend to sell it.
[3] The Applicant filed two sets of submissions on 10th August 2016 in support of his application for revocation.But the gist in both submissions is that the estate comprises of two properties namely:
1. NJIA/BURIERU/1585; and
2. NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836
But, the second property was not included in the distribution of the estate. He blames the petitioner for the mix-up and dishonesty. He stated that the petitioner caused the confusion of the properties when he was mandated by the family to apply for rectification of grant after they realized the acreage shown in the certificate of confirmation was bigger than the ground. He now requests that court to have this property included. He also proposes how the estate should be distributed.
[4] The petitioner neither filed any reply to nor submissions on the application. However, in the affidavit sworn on 17th July 2014, albeit in support of his application for removal of inhibition,he stated that each of the beneficiaries received their respective portions of land as per the confirmation of grant. He stated further that the Applicant herein has a bigger portion of land comprised of 0. 65 Ha whereas he only has 0. 35 Ha. He denies any wrongdoing.
ANALYSIS AND DETERMINATION
[5] I have perused the record. The estate property identified in the petition is NJIA/BURIERU/1585. But, on 17th November 2006, the Chief ofNjia Location wrote to court and stated that the deceased had two properties, namely, plot number 1585 and 836 in Njia/Burieri Adjudication Section. The question of these two properties still lingers in these proceedings; the Applicant has asked for its inclusion. It is surprising that the petitioner has alluded that the Applicant has bigger portion of land measuring 0. 65 Ha and that he has only 0. 35 which is NJIA/BURIERU/1585. Without any doubt, there is need for the estate property to be ascertained in this case, for it appears it could be composed of the two properties, namely;
1. NJIA/BURIERU/1585; and
2. NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836
[6] The concealment of such material fact renders the grant herein a candidate for revocation under section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. And, although the grant herein has been revoked twice, nothing in law prevents further revocation where the legal threshold is attained as in this case. Accordingly, I revoke the grant made on 23rd September 2010 to the petitioner. I also note the need to preserve the two properties and so I issue prohibition orders to be registered on both properties namely;
1. NJIA/BURIERU/1585; and
2. NJIA/CIAMWENDA/836
[7] But, to avoid any further delay, I direct parties to intimate to court within 7 days the person or persons to be appointed administrators of the estate lest I should exercise my final discretion in section 66 of the Law of Succession Act. It is so ordered.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court at Meru this 21st day of MAY 2018
……………………………..
F. GIKONYO
JUDGE
In the presence of:
M/s. Ayatta advocate for Petitioner
Mr. Ondieki advocate for Protestor – absent
……………………………..
F. GIKONYO
JUDGE