[2020] KEHC 7602 (KLR)
The court found that, in light of the protest filed against the confirmation of grant and the absence of directions on how the protest should proceed, it is necessary for the parties to take a mention date for directions. The court did not determine the substantive issues regarding entitlement or distribution but...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 7602 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Reuben Burudi Satia; Respondent: Ayub Chemanga; Respondent: Edward Mahanga; Respondent: Mark Mmasi; Respondent: Jairus M. Wachiya; Respondent: David Muswachi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 556 of 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Directions for Protest Hearing
- Outcome
- Directions to be taken for hearing of protest before confirmation of grant.
- Judges
- CM Njagi
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Confirmation of Grant, Protest to Distribution, Estate 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
Reuben Burudi Satia
Applicant
Ayub Chemanga
Respondent
Edward Mahanga
Respondent
Mark Mmasi
Respondent
Jairus M. Wachiya
Respondent
David Muswachi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Directions for Protest Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner is entitled to confirmation of grant for the estate of Lydia Khamalishi.
- 2 Whether the protestor's objection to the mode of distribution and the petitioner's standing is valid.
- 3 What directions should be given for the hearing of the protest.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, in light of the protest filed against the confirmation of grant and the absence of directions on how the protest should proceed, it is necessary for the parties to take a mention date for directions. The court did not determine the substantive issues regarding entitlement or distribution but emphasized the need for procedural clarity and fairness by ensuring that the protest is properly heard and determined before any confirmation of grant. The ruling is thus limited to directing the parties to seek directions for the hearing of the protest, in accordance with the requirements of the Law of Succession Act and principles of fair hearing.
Court Disposition
Directions to be taken for hearing of protest before confirmation of grant.
Orders
- Parties to take a mention date for directions on how to proceed with the protest.
- No confirmation of grant until protest is heard and determined.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 556 OF 2004
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF LYDIA KHAMALISHI (DECEASED)
REUBEN BURUDI SATIA ……..………….………... PETITIONER
VERSUS
AYUB CHEMANGA ………………….....……...... 1ST PROTESTOR
EDWARD MAHANGA ……………………......... 2ND PROTESTOR
MARK MMASI ………........................................... 3RD PROTESTOR
JAIRUS M. WACHIYA ………………………....... 4TH PROTESTOR
DAVID MUSWACHI ……………..….................... 5TH PROTESTOR
RULING
1. The petitioner has filed summons for confirmation of grant dated 30th March, 2012 seeking that the grant issued to him on the 7th May, 2008 be confirmed. The application was opposed by one David Muswachi vide his affidavit of protest filed in court on the 16th April, 2013 in which he opposed the mode of distribution proposed by the petitioner on the grounds that the petitioner is a stranger to the estate of the deceased and that he is not even a member of the deceased’s family. Further that the action by the respondent of filing the succession cause was mischievous and intended to grab the estate of the deceased.
2. The affidavit of protest was followed by a reply by the petitioner to the affidavit of protest filed on 30th April, 2013. Since then the petitioner has been taking hearing dates for the hearing of the application yet no directions have been taken on the manner as to how the protest should proceed.
3. In the premises parties to take a mention date with the view of taking directions on how to proceed with the protest.
Delivered, dated and signed in open court at Kakamega this 6th day of February, 2020.
J. NJAGI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Mukavale for petitioner
Petitioner – present
Protestors - absent
Court Assistant - Polycap
30 days right of appeal.