[2010] KEHC 258 (KLR)
The court considered the application for review of its judgment on the basis of alleged contradictions regarding the parcels of land forming the estate. The applicant argued that the judgment erroneously referred to two parcels when only one existed and sought equal division of the estate. The respondent supported...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 258 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Jeniffer Mukami; Petitioner: Rebecca M’Rimberia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 242 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
- Outcome
- Application for review acknowledged; matter of review under consideration.
- Judges
- AM Cockar
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Estate Distribution, Review of Judgment
- 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
Jeniffer Mukami
Petitioner
Rebecca M’Rimberia
Petitioner
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Review of Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judgment delivered on 23rd May 2008 should be reviewed to correct alleged contradictions regarding the parcels of land forming the deceased's estate.
- 2 Whether the estate, specifically parcel NYAKI/CHUGU/310, should be divided equally between the two petitioners as per current boundaries.
- 3 Whether the judgment was biased against the 1st petitioner and failed to consider the interests of the deceased's daughters.
Ratio Decidendi
The court considered the application for review of its judgment on the basis of alleged contradictions regarding the parcels of land forming the estate. The applicant argued that the judgment erroneously referred to two parcels when only one existed and sought equal division of the estate. The respondent supported the need for review, citing the interests of the deceased's daughters and the wishes of the clan. The court found that the application raised issues regarding the accuracy of the judgment and the proper identification of the estate's assets. However, the ruling does not explicitly grant or deny the review but acknowledges the existence of an application for review on record,...
Court Disposition
Application for review acknowledged; matter of review under consideration.
Orders
- The application for review of the judgment dated 23rd May 2008 is on record and will be considered by the court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 242 OF 2003
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF M’RIMBERIA M’IKIRIMA.........................................................DECEASED.
JENNIFFER MUKAMI)
REBECCA M’RIMBERIA.......................................................................................................................) PETITIONERS
R U L I N G
The application is the Summons dated 28th September 2010. It has been brought by the 2nd Petitioner acting in person. It quotes no provision of the law. However it seeks orders that:-
1. That this honourable court be pleased to review its judgment dated 23rd May 2008 and order for Parcel NYAKI/CHUGU/310 to be divided equally between the two petitioners (widows) as per the current boundaries thereto.
The grounds of the application on the face of the application is as follows:-
(1)That the judgment herein was delivered on 25th May 2008.
(2)That the said judgment has a long of contradictions since it gives two parcel Nos. NYAKI/CHUGU/310 & 40 as belonging to the deceased. Whereas the deceased only left parcel No. Nyaki/Chugu/310.
(3)That the same judgment is biased against the 1st defendant.
The application is also supported by an affidavit sworn by the 2nd petitioner REBECCA MWENGWA M’RIMBERIA.In brief the 1st Petitioner deposes that judgment in the Succession Cause was delivered on 23rd May 2008 stipulating the mode of distribution of the estate. The 1st petitioner urges the court to have the Deputy Registrar of this court to sign all documents of transfer as the petitioner had become uncooperative.
The application is opposed.The 1st petitioner has filed a replying affidavit in which she opposes the application. In her affidavit the 1st Petitioner deposes that the judgment in the instant cause had not been executed because it was against the wishes of the deceased and clan members. The 1st petitioner points out certain ‘contradictions’ in the learned judges judgment as including mention of two parcels of land when in fact deceased owned only one parcel NYAKI/CHUGU/130. She also deposes that daughters of the deceased who she avers have been left homeless. She deposes that the judgment need to be reviewed. Indeed there is an application on record seeking a review of the learned Judgment of 23rd May 2008
Dated Signed and delivered at Meru this 19th day of November 2010
LESIIT, J
JUDGE
In the presence of the parties
Kirimi – Court Clerk.
Mr. Elijah K. Ogoti Advocate for 1st Petitioner.
2nd Petitioner in person.
LESIIT, J
JUDGE