[2010] KEHC 2646 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, Frankline Kithinji Murithi, failed to provide evidence that the administrator omitted any property belonging to the deceased from the estate, as the respondent's evidence regarding the sale of the disputed property was uncontroverted. The court held that the requirement to provide...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] KEHC 2646 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Frankline Kithinji Murithi; Respondent: Pharis Nyaga Murithi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 208 of 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Post Confirmation Applications
- Outcome
- Applicant's application dismissed; respondent's application allowed.
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates, Confirmation of Grant, Revocation of Grant, Duties of Administrator
- 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
Frankline Kithinji Murithi
Applicant
Pharis Nyaga Murithi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Post Confirmation Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the administrator failed to include all properties of the deceased in the estate distribution.
- 2 Whether the administrator failed to provide an inventory as required by law.
- 3 Whether there is a continuing trust necessitating appointment of additional administrators.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, Frankline Kithinji Murithi, failed to provide evidence that the administrator omitted any property belonging to the deceased from the estate, as the respondent's evidence regarding the sale of the disputed property was uncontroverted. The court held that the requirement to provide an inventory applied prior to confirmation of the grant, and that the administrator's current duty was to distribute the estate as per the confirmed grant. The court also found no evidence of a continuing trust or justification for appointing additional administrators. The delay in distribution was attributed to the lack of original title documents and the need for survey...
Court Disposition
Applicant's application dismissed; respondent's application allowed.
Orders
- The land registrar is granted leave to dispense with the requirements of the original title documents in respect of Mwimbi/Murugi/1475, 1477 and 1478, putting into effect the certificate of confirmation of grant.
- The Chamber Summons dated 16th December 2009 is dismissed with costs to Pharis Nyaga Murithi.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
17 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
Succession Cause 208 of 1993
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MURITHI MUGAMBI (DECEASED)
FRANKLINE KITHINJI MURITHI.........................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
PHARIS NYAGA MURITHI .............................................RESPONDENT
RULING
There is a ruling delivered by this court dated 24th November 2005. That ruling related to the distribution of the deceased estate. Following that ruling, the grant was confirmed and a certificate of confirmation was issued on 30th May 2006. It indicated the mode of distribution of the deceased estate. That ruling is the subject of a pending appeal before the Court of Appeal. An application has been filed which is the subject of this ruling. It is dated 16th December 2009. That application is filed by one of the beneficiaries namely; Frankline Kithinji Murithi. He seeks the following prayers:-
1. That the court be pleased to convict and sentence the personal representative named above for the offences committed under this Act (sic).
2. This court be pleased to appoint two more administrators to represent the interests of the other two houses.
3. The court be pleased to use its inherent powers to revoke the grant.
In support of that application, it was argued that the administrator Pharis Nyaga Murithi failed to include the deceased property which was stated to be plot number 45 Kabeche Maara District. Frankline did not annex a search to prove that the plot belong to the deceased. In response to the said application, Pharis attached a certificate of lease of parcel number Mwimbi/chogoria/893/35 which he said was sold by the deceased before his death to Sarah Maitha. Since the deposition of Pharis in respect of that property were not controverted the court rejects Frankline assertion that the administrator failed to include all the properties of the deceased. Frankline further argued that the administrator failed to give inventory of the deceased assets as required by section 83(e) and (g). I have looked at those sections. The inventory was required prior to confirmation of grant. Once grant was confirmed, all that remains is the distribution of the deceased property to the various beneficiaries. Frankline further alleged that there is a continuing trust and that there is therefore need for another administrator to be appointed to join Pharis. Again, Frankline did not give details of who was the subject of the continuing trust. The last complaint by Frankline related to the delay in the distribution of the estate. He therefore seeks that the grant be revoked because Pharis has delayed in distributing the property. I have in perusing this file and I have come across a pending application by Pharis seeking the court’s order that the land registrar would dispense with the requirement of the original titles in respect of parcels number 1475, 1477, and 1478. He blames the lack of original titles, in respect of those parcels, as the reason for not distributing and further states that the beneficiaries will be required to provide finances for the survey work to be carried to enable distribution to be done. In my view, the interest of justice will best be served by entertaining the application filed by Pharis dated 7th January 2010 and disallowing the application of Frankline dated 16th December 2009. To entertain the application by Pharis of 7th January 2010 would allow the putting into effect this court’s ruling dated 24th November 2005. I therefore grant the following orders:-
1. The land registrar is granted leave to dispense with the requirements of the original title documents in respect of Mwimbi/Murugi/1475, 1477 and 1478 putting into effect the certificate of confirmation of grant in this matter issued on 24th November 2005 and dated 30th May 2006.
2. The Chamber Summons dated 16th December 2009 is dismissed with costs being awarded to Pharis Nyaga Murithi. The application dated 7th January 2010 is allowed in terms of number (1) above with no orders as to costs.
Dated and delivered at Meru this 21st day of May 2010.
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE