[2024] KEHC 6519 (KLR)
The court found that the applicants were properly served with the notice to show cause via the postal address disclosed in the petition, as evidenced by the court record. The applicants failed to provide medical evidence to support the claim that one of them was indisposed, and no explanation was offered for the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 6519 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Anne Munagi Lugalia; Applicant: Lonna Musimbi Chavangi; Applicant: Ebrahim Enunda Lidubwi; Deceased: Joel Munzatsi Lidubwi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kisumu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Succession Cause E032 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Reinstate Petition
- Outcome
- Application to reinstate the petition declined; file marked as closed.
- Judges
- MS Shariff
- Legal Topics
- Revocation of Grant, Reinstatement of Petition, Service of Notice, Delay in Application
- 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
Anne Munagi Lugalia
Applicant
Lonna Musimbi Chavangi
Applicant
Ebrahim Enunda Lidubwi
Applicant
Joel Munzatsi Lidubwi
Deceased
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Reinstate Petition
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicants were properly served with the notice to show cause before revocation of the grant.
- 2 Whether sufficient cause has been shown to warrant reinstatement of the succession petition.
- 3 Whether the delay in seeking reinstatement is justified.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicants were properly served with the notice to show cause via the postal address disclosed in the petition, as evidenced by the court record. The applicants failed to provide medical evidence to support the claim that one of them was indisposed, and no explanation was offered for the prolonged inaction by the other applicants. Consequently, the court held that there was no sufficient cause to warrant reinstatement of the petition nearly nine years after the grant was revoked. The applicants were advised to file a fresh petition in the appropriate jurisdiction, given the location of the estate properties.
Court Disposition
Application to reinstate the petition declined; file marked as closed.
Orders
- The application to reinstate the petition is declined.
- Applicants are at liberty to file a fresh petition in Vihiga courts.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
14 paragraphs
In re Estate of Joel Munzatsi Lidubwi (Deceased) (Miscellaneous Succession Cause E032 of 2024) [2024] KEHC 6519 (KLR) (30 May 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 6519 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kisumu
Miscellaneous Succession Cause E032 of 2024
MS Shariff, J
May 30, 2024
ARISING FROM SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 152 OF 2003 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF: JOEL MUNZATSI LIDUBWI..........................................DECEASED AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY: ANNE MUNAGI LUGALIA LONNA MUSIMBI CHAVANGI EBRAHIM ENUNDA LIDUBWI.................................APPLICANTS
Ruling
1. I have perused the notice of motion dated 29th May 2024, and the supporting affidavit sworn by Anne Munagi Lugalia, Lonna Musimbi Chavangi and Ebrahim Enunda Lidumbwi on even date and I do note that whereas the Applicants blame the court for alleged failure to serve them with a notice to show cause, the court record clearly reveals that such notice was sent to them on 7th July 2015 through postal address P.O. Box 2105 Kisumu which address is disclosed in the petition.
2. It is noteworthy that it is now almost 9 years since the grant herein was revoked and whereas the Applicants allege that one of them specifically Lona Musimbi Chavangi was indisposed for a lengthy period of time, no medical evidence has been annexed to prove that assertion. Furthermore, no reasons have been advanced to explain the inertia on the part of the other Applicants.
3. Premised on the reasons aforestated I decline to reinstate this petition. The Applicants are at liberty to file a fresh petition in Vihiga courts given that most of the properties are situated within the geographical jurisdiction of Vihiga Law Courts.
4. This file is marked as closed.
DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT KISUMU THIS 30THDAY OF MAY, 2024MWANISHA S. SHARIFFJUDGE