[2022] KEHC 11388 (KLR)

[2022] KEHC 11388 (KLR)

The court found that the application to revoke the grant was misconceived because the alleged concealment related to events (the decree in Kakamega CMC Misc Award No 5 of 2010) that occurred after the grant of representation was made. The administrators could not have concealed a fact that did not exist at the time...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] KEHC 11388 (KLR)
Parties
Administrator: Anthony Mulima Litswa; Administrator: Peter Musonye Litswa; Applicant: Andrew Shilabula Mulima; Applicant: Alfred Shitakhwa; Applicant: Peter Mulima Lusila
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 119 of 2002
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant and Related Orders
Outcome
Application to revoke grant dismissed; confirmation orders and certificate of confirmation of grant set aside; property transmission cancelled; grant not revoked; leave to appeal granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
WM Musyoka
Legal Topics
Confirmation of Grant, Revocation of Grant, Concealment of Material Facts, Land Disputes, Pending Litigation, Distribution of Estate
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Confirmation of Grant Revocation of Grant Concealment of Material Facts Land Disputes Pending Litigation Distribution of Estate

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Mulima Litswa

Administrator

Peter Musonye Litswa

Administrator

Andrew Shilabula Mulima

Applicant

Alfred Shitakhwa

Applicant

Peter Mulima Lusila

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Revocation of Grant and Related Orders

  1. 1 Whether the grant of representation or its confirmation should be revoked due to alleged concealment of a prior court decree affecting the estate property.
  2. 2 Whether the administrators acted in bad faith by seeking confirmation of grant while litigation over the property was pending.
  3. 3 Whether the certificate of confirmation of grant and subsequent transmission of property should be set aside pending resolution of the related suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the application to revoke the grant was misconceived because the alleged concealment related to events (the decree in Kakamega CMC Misc Award No 5 of 2010) that occurred after the grant of representation was made. The administrators could not have concealed a fact that did not exist at the time of the grant application. The real issue was with the confirmation of the grant, which was sought and obtained while there was a subsisting court decree and pending litigation over the property. The court held that the proper remedy was to set aside the confirmation orders and cancel the certificate of confirmation of grant, not to revoke the grant itself. The property in...

Court Disposition

Application to revoke grant dismissed; confirmation orders and certificate of confirmation of grant set aside; property transmission cancelled; grant not revoked; leave to appeal granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Orders confirming the grant made on January 16, 2012 are vacated or set aside.
  • Certificate of confirmation of grant dated January 16, 2012 is cancelled.