[2019] KEHC 7966 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 7966 (KLR)

The court found that there was a clear mistake in the original judgment, as Florence Kaimenyi, who had purchased 0.5 acres from the 1st Protestor, was not allocated her share in the distribution of the estate. The 1st Protestor admitted to the sale, and the court recognized that the interested party was entitled to...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 7966 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Cyprian Murori M’Arimi; Respondent: Francis Mutua; Respondent: Angelica Mberenya M’Karimbi; Respondent: Muchui Karimbi; Interested Party: Florence Kaimenyi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 505 of 2008
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Review and Rectification of Grant
Outcome
application for review allowed; grant rectified
Judges
A Mabeya
Legal Topics
Succession, Distribution of Estate, Rectification of Grant, Purchaser Interest, Beneficiary Entitlement
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Distribution of Estate Rectification of Grant Purchaser Interest Beneficiary Entitlement

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cyprian Murori M’Arimi

Applicant

Francis Mutua

Respondent

Angelica Mberenya M’Karimbi

Respondent

Muchui Karimbi

Respondent

Florence Kaimenyi

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Review and Rectification of Grant

  1. 1 Whether there was a mistake apparent on the face of the record in the distribution of the estate.
  2. 2 Whether Florence Kaimenyi, as purchaser of a share from the 1st Protestor, is entitled to a portion of the estate.
  3. 3 Whether the distribution should be rectified to ensure equality among beneficiaries.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was a clear mistake in the original judgment, as Florence Kaimenyi, who had purchased 0.5 acres from the 1st Protestor, was not allocated her share in the distribution of the estate. The 1st Protestor admitted to the sale, and the court recognized that the interested party was entitled to the 1st Protestor's share, but not more than any other beneficiary. The court further held that all beneficiaries, including Florence Kananu (widow of a deceased son), should receive equal shares. Consequently, the grant was rectified to distribute the estate equally among the beneficiaries, including the interested party, in accordance with the principles of equality and...

Court Disposition

application for review allowed; grant rectified

Orders

  • The application dated 28th February, 2019 is allowed.
  • The grant is rectified to distribute the estate as specified in the ruling.