[2011] KEHC 1721 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant was involved in the process of obtaining the grant and had attended the confirmation hearing, giving consent to the mode of distribution. Furthermore, the applicant had already received substantial benefits from the deceased during his lifetime, including settlement on specific...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 1721 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Charity Nduta Kariuki; Respondent: Edes Wangui Wambugu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 279 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation and Annulment of Grant
- Outcome
- summons for revocation of grant dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Revocation of Grant, Intervivos Gifts, Distribution of Estate
- 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
Charity Nduta Kariuki
Applicant
Edes Wangui Wambugu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation and Annulment of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was excluded from the process of obtaining the grant of representation.
- 2 Whether the applicant was excluded from the distribution of the deceased's estate.
- 3 Whether the applicant had already received sufficient provision from the deceased during his lifetime (intervivos).
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant was involved in the process of obtaining the grant and had attended the confirmation hearing, giving consent to the mode of distribution. Furthermore, the applicant had already received substantial benefits from the deceased during his lifetime, including settlement on specific parcels of land. The respondent's actions were consistent with the requirements of section 42 of the Law of Succession Act, which mandates that intervivos benefits be considered in the distribution of the estate. Consequently, there was no basis for revocation or annulment of the grant as the applicant was neither excluded from the process nor unfairly deprived of her share of the...
Court Disposition
summons for revocation of grant dismissed
Orders
- The summons for revocation and annulment of grant dated 11th March 2009 is dismissed.
- Each party to bear her own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
REPUBLICOF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 279 OF 2009
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF
KARIUKI NYAGA KARIUKI.................................DECEASED
AND
CHARITY NDUTA KARIUKI.......................................APPLICANT
Versus
EDES WANGUI WAMBUGU.....................................RESPONDENT
RULING
The subject matter of this ruling is the summons for revocation and annulment of grant dated 11th March 2009. The summons was taken out by Charity Nduta Kariuki, hereinafter referred to as the Applicant. The Respondent filed an affidavit in support of the summons. Edes Wangui Wambugu hereinafter referred to as the Respondent filed two replying affidavits to oppose the summons. She also elicited the support of one Richard Nyaga Kariuki who filed a replying affidavit to oppose the summons.
I have considered the rival submissions and averments. The applicant has raised two main grounds to persuade this court to revoke the grant. First, it is said that she was not consulted nor involved in the process. Secondly, she alleged that she was excluded from sharing the estate. The Respondent on her part is of the view that the Applicant was involved throughout the process of seeking for the grant. It is alleged she even attended court during the hearing of the confirmation of grant on 11th March 2009 and that she gave consent on the mode of distribution. The Respondent further pointed out that the Applicant had been settled by the deceased in his lifetime on L.R. no.Githi/Ithanji/462. It is said she also benefited from L.R. no. Githi/Ithanji/463 which she later sold. The Respondent stated that she took into account those benefits the applicant had received intervivos as required under s 42 of the Law of Succession Act.
Having considered the submissions from both sides I am convinced by the submissions of the Respondent that the Applicant was involved in the process of obtaining grant. I am also convinced that she was sufficiently provided for intervivos by the deceased.
In the end I seek no merit in the summons for revocation of grant dated 11th March 2009. The same is dismissed. I direct each party to meet her own costs.
Dated and delivered this 29th day of July 2011.
J.K. SERGON
JUDGE
In Open Court in the presence of Mr. Kingori the petitioner N/A Muhoho for the Respondent.
J.K. SERGON
JUDGE