[2018] KEHC 8052 (KLR)
The court found that the proposed distribution of the estate was not in compliance with the Law of Succession Act, as several daughters of the deceased were excluded from inheritance without their express renunciation. The administrator's sale of estate property prior to confirmation of grant was declared void ab...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 8052 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: David Muthamia Nteto; Respondent: Joanina Nteto; Respondent: Stanley Muthuku; Respondent: Japhet N. Muthamia; Respondent: Joakim Kanyaki; Respondent: Lawrence Mukaraia Muthamia; Respondent: Jackson Kauabia; Respondent: Mary Gakii; Respondent: Petithia Mukiri; Respondent: Millamia Rumano; Respondent: Elizabeth Genaro; Respondent: Marieta Samson; Respondent: Tabitha Joseph Pasquarina Lawrence; Respondent: Charity Mungiria; Respondent: Mary Mureithi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 633 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate
- Outcome
- Partial confirmation of grant with redistribution ordered to include previously excluded daughters; sale of estate property prior to confirmation declared void.
- Legal Topics
- Intestate Succession, Distribution of Estate, Administrator Powers, Equal Sharing Among Children, Sale of Estate Property, Consent of Beneficiaries
- 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
David Muthamia Nteto
Applicant
Joanina Nteto
Respondent
Stanley Muthuku
Respondent
Japhet N. Muthamia
Respondent
Joakim Kanyaki
Respondent
Lawrence Mukaraia Muthamia
Respondent
Jackson Kauabia
Respondent
Mary Gakii
Respondent
Petithia Mukiri
Respondent
Millamia Rumano
Respondent
Elizabeth Genaro
Respondent
Marieta Samson
Respondent
Tabitha Joseph Pasquarina Lawrence
Respondent
Charity Mungiria
Respondent
Mary Mureithi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed distribution of the deceased's estate is in accordance with the Law of Succession Act.
- 2 Whether the administrator had authority to sell estate property before confirmation of grant.
- 3 Whether all beneficiaries, including daughters, are entitled to a share of the estate unless they have expressly renounced their rights.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the proposed distribution of the estate was not in compliance with the Law of Succession Act, as several daughters of the deceased were excluded from inheritance without their express renunciation. The administrator's sale of estate property prior to confirmation of grant was declared void ab initio, as administrators are required to preserve the estate for distribution and not to benefit personally or dispose of assets prematurely. The court held that, in the absence of minor children and without valid renunciation by any beneficiary, all children of the deceased are entitled to equal shares of the estate. The court ordered a redistribution to ensure that the...
Court Disposition
Partial confirmation of grant with redistribution ordered to include previously excluded daughters; sale of estate property prior to confirmation declared void.
Orders
- Petithia Mukiri to give up 1 acre to be shared equally between Millamia Rumano and Marietta Samson (½ acre each).
- David Muthamia Nteto to retain 2 acres; ½ acre from his share to go to Mary Mureithi.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
41 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 633 OF 2014
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF ISIDORO M’MUTHAMIA
ALIAS SIDOLO MUTHAMIA RIMBERIA - DECEASED
DAVID MUTHAMIA NTETO..................................PETITIONER
RULING
The Deceased Isidoro M’Muthamia died on 21st June 1988 intestate as per certificate of Death dated 3rd December 1990 and was survived by dependants, 1st wife having died, 9 daughters and 6 sons as shown in the letter dated 30th July 2014 written by Chief Gaitu East Location.
The deceased estate was made up of parcel of land number Abothuguchi/Gaitu/662 measuring 6. 73 Ha David Muthamia Nteto petitioned for letters of Administration intestate to the estate of the deceased and the Grant was made to him on 2nd March 2015.
Upon expiry of the statutory 6 months the Administrator applied for confirmation of grant and the beneficiaries as listed in consent to confirmation dated 29th April 2016 and consent to Mode of Distribution dated 29th April 2016 signed giving consent.
Out of the 16 surviving dependants (2nd wife) and beneficiaries the supporting affidavit at paragraph 5 has distributed the estate 2 plots No. 14 – Mitunguu and No. 6A – Giatune to the surving widow Joanina Nteto and L.R. No. Abothuguchi/Gaitu/662 ot
Stanley Muthuku – 2 acres
David Muthamia Nteto – 2. 5 acres
Japhet N. Muthamia – 2. 5 acres
Joakim Kanyaki – 2. 5 acres
Lawrence Mukaraia Muthamia – 2. 5 acres
Jackson Kauabia – 2. 5 acres
Mary Gakii – 0. 5 acres
Petithia Mukiri – 1. 0 acres
No share has been given to Mary Gakii Samson Millamia Rumano, Elizabeth Genaro, Marieta Samson, Tabitha Joseph Pasquarina Lawrence and Charity Mungiria all daughters of the deceased and there is no explanation in the affidavit in support of the confirmation and distribution as to why they are left out and they have not filled a form to say they are not interested in the estate.
On 16th November 2017 Mary Gakii, Elizabeth and Tabitha Joseph appended their signatures on the court record confirming they were agreeable to the mode of distribution proposed by the Administrator. That leaves us with 4 daughters who are not provided for and who have not denounced their entitlements to the estate.
In the court file is also an agreement for sale of land showing that L.R. Nkuene/Mitunguee/16 A which is shown in affidavit as one of the 2 plots given to the deceased persons surviving widow has been sold by the Administrator at a purchase price of Kshs 1,000,000/=
This purported sale is void ab initio as the Administrator has no authority to sell real property belonging to an estate before grant of Letters of Administration is confirmed. The duties of an administrator are not meant to confer personal benefits but to preserve the estate for distribution to the beneficiaries.
Under S.35(5) of the Law of Succession Act it would appear that where the deceased is survived by children the division of the property among the children should be equal and that was the holding in the Matter of the Estate of Wanjihia Njuguna (Deceased) – Nairobi H.C. Succession Cause No. 533 of 2002.
In the matter of the Estate of Kinyukui Karanja (Deceased) save that as held by Omolo J.A. in Rono vs Rono and Another (2005) IEA 363 it would be unjust to distribute the estate in equal portions particularly in the case of a young child who is still to be maintained, educated and generally seen through life. It therefore follows that there being no minor child surviving the deceased the deceased children should receive equal shares of the estate in the circumstances.
This court will therefore make an order that the proposed distribution to other beneficiaries to be reduced/discounted to enable Millamia Rumano, Marieta Samson, Mary Mureithi.
Pasquerina Lawrence and Charity Mung’ira are bequeathed a portion of their father’s estate.
1. Petithia will get 1 acre and give up one acre to be shared between;
2. Millamia Romano and
3. Marietta Samson in equal shares i.e ½ acre each.
4. David Muthamia will remain with 2 acres.
5. ½ acre from David Muthamia to go to Mary Murithi, because it appears he has a life interest in L.R. No. Nkuene/Mitunguu/16 A which accordingly to his proposal should go to the deceased surviving widow.
6. Joanina Nteto, should also benefit from Giatune Plot No. 6 A.
Stanley Muthuku, Joakim Kanyaki, Lawrence Mukaria and Jackson Kaumbia to donate portions of their shares to enable charity Mungira to get ½ an acre out of L.R. No. Abothuguchi/Gaitu/662.
Costs of application for confirmation to be borne by each party as this is a cause affecting members of same family.
Orders accordingly.
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE
RULING, DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN COURT IN28TH FEBRUARY 2018.
HON. A.ONG’INJO
JUDGE