[2020] KEHC 2411 (KLR)
The court found that, although the administrator only partially complied with the previous order by presenting the beneficiaries in court but failing to file a further affidavit of disclosure, all beneficiaries were present and none objected to the proposed distribution. The court determined that the two...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2020] KEHC 2411 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Wafula Madongo; Respondent: Naomi Nyangweso Matongo; Respondent: Pamela Khamonya Juneh; Respondent: Sylvia Nafula Wekesa; Respondent: Jackline Nafula; Respondent: Metrine Lela; Respondent: Jackline Nerima; Respondent: Jackline Nambande Madongo; Respondent: Zebediah Nangóli Ndasaba; Respondent: Martin Shikuku Barasa; Respondent: Brian Masinde Wekesa; Respondent: Edwin Madongo Wekesa; Respondent: Jim Shiundu Musawe
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kakamega
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 369 of 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant
- Outcome
- Grant confirmed; estate to be distributed as proposed in the applications.
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Beneficiary Identification
- 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
Wafula Madongo
Applicant
Naomi Nyangweso Matongo
Respondent
Pamela Khamonya Juneh
Respondent
Sylvia Nafula Wekesa
Respondent
Jackline Nafula
Respondent
Metrine Lela
Respondent
Jackline Nerima
Respondent
Jackline Nambande Madongo
Respondent
Zebediah Nangóli Ndasaba
Respondent
Martin Shikuku Barasa
Respondent
Brian Masinde Wekesa
Respondent
Edwin Madongo Wekesa
Respondent
Jim Shiundu Musawe
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the administrator complied with the court's orders regarding disclosure and attendance of all beneficiaries.
- 2 Whether the applications for confirmation of grant and distribution of the estate should be allowed in the absence of objections.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that, although the administrator only partially complied with the previous order by presenting the beneficiaries in court but failing to file a further affidavit of disclosure, all beneficiaries were present and none objected to the proposed distribution. The court determined that the two applications for confirmation of grant, though procedurally irregular due to the filing of a second application instead of a supplementary affidavit, did not prejudice any party. In the absence of any opposition and with all beneficiaries consenting, the court confirmed the grant and ordered distribution of the estate as proposed in the affidavits supporting the applications.
Court Disposition
Grant confirmed; estate to be distributed as proposed in the applications.
Orders
- The applications for confirmation of grant dated 9th June 2015 and 2nd June 2020 are allowed as proposed.
- The estate of the deceased shall be distributed as per the affidavits in support of the applications.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
13 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAKAMEGA
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 369 OF 2014
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MADONGO WASIRWA
alias MATONGO WASIRUA (DECEASED)
RULING
1. On 30th April 2020, I delivered a ruling on the confirmation application dated 17th April 2015, in which I postponed the confirmation application to allow the administrator comply with court orders made on 25th April 2016, which had required him to avail all the beneficiaries in court and to file an affidavit to disclose all the beneficiaries.
2. The administrator only partially complied with the first limb of that order, by a court, on 29th July 2020, thirteen individuals, inclusive of himself, who he claimed were beneficiaries of the estate of the deceased. He did not file a further affidavit to make a disclosure of the beneficiaries. Those in attendance, on 29th July 2020, were Wafula Madongo, Naomi Nyangweso Matongo, Pamela Khamonya Juneh, Sylvia Nafula Wekesa, Jackline Nafula, Metrine Lela, Jackline Nerima, Jackline Nambande Madongo, Zebediah Nangóli Ndasaba, Martin Shikuku Barasa, Brian Masinde Wekesa, Edwin Madongo Wekesa and Jim Shiundu Musawe.
3. At the time of the ruling of 30th April 2020, there was only one summons for confirmation of grant before me, dated 9th June 2015, which sought to distribute a property known as North/Kabras/Kivaywa/105, amongst five named individuals, who had signed the requisite consent in Form 37. At the time the individuals named in paragraph 2 here above were presented before me on 29th July 2020, another confirmation application had been placed on record, dated 2nd June 2020, filed in court on even date, seeking to distribute another property, North Kabras/Kivaywa/98, amongst some six individuals, who had also signed consents in Form 37. The administrator explained that he had established that that property belonged to the deceased, hence the application. It was needless to file a second application, since there was one pending already. He should have just filed a supplementary affidavit. However, no one suffers any prejudice. The two applications shall be disposed of simultaneously.
4. As none of the individuals who appeared before me on 29th July 2020, expressed opposition or objection to the distribution proposed in the two applications, dated 9th June 2015 and 2nd June 2020, I shall accordingly allow the applications in the terms proposed. The estate of the deceased shall be disposed of as per the proposals in the affidavits sworn in support thereof. The grant on record is hereby confirmed in those terms. A certificate of confirmation of grant to issue to the administrator accordingly. It is so ordered.
DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED IN OPEN COURT AT KAKAMEGATHIS 16th DAY OF October 2020
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE