[2022] KEHC 2705 (KLR)
The court found that while it is important to consider existing developments on the estate land during distribution, an administrator or beneficiary cannot delay or frustrate the distribution process to the detriment of other beneficiaries. The confirmed grant had already specified the shares, and over two years had...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2022] KEHC 2705 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Caroline Nchabira M’Mwithirwa; Respondent: George Mwenda Kimathi; Respondent: Stephen Kirimi Rutere
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 299 of 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Enforcement of Confirmed Grant and Ancillary Orders
- Outcome
- Application partially allowed.
- Judges
- EM Muriithi
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates, Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Land, Beneficiaries Rights
- 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
Caroline Nchabira M’Mwithirwa
Applicant
George Mwenda Kimathi
Respondent
Stephen Kirimi Rutere
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Enforcement of Confirmed Grant and Ancillary Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should authorize the Executive Officer to sign documents on behalf of the 1st petitioner to effect subdivision and transfer of the estate land as per the confirmed grant.
- 2 Whether the OCS should provide security during the subdivision exercise.
- 3 Whether the 1st petitioner/respondent is justified in delaying the distribution of the estate property.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that while it is important to consider existing developments on the estate land during distribution, an administrator or beneficiary cannot delay or frustrate the distribution process to the detriment of other beneficiaries. The confirmed grant had already specified the shares, and over two years had elapsed since confirmation without completion of distribution. The court emphasized the statutory duty for expeditious administration and distribution of the estate, and held that the applicant was entitled to orders facilitating the subdivision and transfer as per the grant, with safeguards for all parties to participate in the survey process. The court granted the order for...
Court Disposition
Application partially allowed.
Orders
- The Administrator shall within 90 days file an accurate and full account of the distribution of the estate to complete distribution to the beneficiaries.
- Prayer No. 3 of the Summons dated 20/9/2021 is granted as prayed, with liberty to the respondents to avail their own surveyors at their own cost.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 299 OF 1997
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MWITHIRWA THIURU ALIAS M’MWITHERWA THIORO (DECEASED)
CAROLINE NCHABIRA M’MWITHIRWA ........................2ND PETITIONER /APPLICANT
VERSUS
GEORGE MWENDA KIMATHI..........................................1ST PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
STEPHEN KIRIMI RUTERE........................................................................2ND RESPONDENT
RULING
1. By an application dated 20/09/2021 the 2nd Petitioner, Caroline Nchabira M’Mwithirwa seeks the following orders:-
“2. THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to authorize and empower the Executive Officer of this Court to sign all the necessary documents on behalf of the 1st petitioner/respondent George Mwenda Kimathi to cause subdivision and transfer of parcel of land No. ABOGETA/LOWER CHURE/795 measuring 2. 48 HA in terms of the confirmed grant herein.
3. THAT this Honourable Court be pleased to issue an order directing the OCS Nkubu Police Station to provide security to the 2nd Petitioner/Applicant Caroline Nchabira M’Mwithirwa and the Surveyor during the exercise to undertake subdivision, mark the boundaries and plant the bacons on parcel of land No. ABOGETA/LOWER/CHURE/795.
2. The application is urged as an effort to give effect to the confirmed Grant herein and based on the ground that “the 1st Petitioner/Respondent has refused to cooperate and cause subdivision and transfer to the respective beneficiaries their share of land under ABOGETA/LOWER CHURE/795 and has vowed not to sign and document or permit the sub-division of the said parcel of land in respect of the grant herein,” which was confirmed on 24/10/2019 in the Cause which was filed in 1997.
3. By Replying Affidavit sworn on 25/10/2021 the 1st Petitioner/respondent explained the delay as follows:-
“5. What has delayed the implementation of the grant is the surveying of the estate property on the ground so that as far as possible the beneficiaries do not lose their personal developments.”
4. The Respondent considers that the “application dated 20/9/2021 is premature as the surveying process is yet to be done and is premised on interior motives”,which he alleges at paragraph 11 and 12 of the Replying Affidavit as follows:
“14 That it is clear to me that the applicant’s intention is to have the Land Surveyed and transferred without any involvement so that she can take the prime part of the estate which can fetch good money and get a buyer easily.
15. That the applicant intention is to deprive and take away some permanent developments put up by other beneficiaries for her selfish gain.”
5. I have confirmed from the record of the court that a Grant of Letters of Administration was confirmed on 24/10/2019 and with respect to the Estate asset ABOGETA/LOWER/CHURE/795 distributed in 3 equal shares of 0. 83 ha each for the 2nd Petitioner, Caroline Nchabira M’Mwithirwa; Florence Gaiti Samwel; and the 1st Petitioner, George Mwenda Kimathi together with others named in the Grant.
6. I accepted that there is merit in the proposition that distribution of the estate asset should accord to the settlement or developments already undertaken by the beneficiaries so far as possible having regard to the respective size of the land distributed to each beneficiary. A survey of the assets for that purpose is important.
7. It is equally true that an administrator or beneficiary cannot hold other beneficiaries ransom by stalling the distribution of the estate assets while he continues to enjoy the assets exclusively. It is over two years since the court was confirmed on 24/10/2019 and the court must ensure expeditious administration and distribution of the estate. Indeed, Section 83 (g) of the Law of Succession Act stipulates completion of distribution of the estate within 6 months on expiring of which the administrators are required to file an account of the due distribution of the estate.
ORDERS
8. Accordingly, for the reasons set at above, the court directs as follows:-
1. The Administrator shall within 90 days file an accurate and full accord of the distribution of the estate herein to completed distribution thereof to the beneficiary.
2. Prayer No. 3 of the Summons dated 20/9/2021 is granted as prayed with liberty to the Respondents to avail, at own cost, their own surveyors in the exercise.
3. The survey exercise set out in (ii) above shall be held on a date to be agreed between the parties, and their counsel are at liberty to attend.
4. The matter shall be mentioned before the court on a date to be fixed for purpose of compliance with Section 83 (g) of the Law of Succession Act.
5. Each party to bear its own costs.
Order accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2022.
EDWARD M. MURIITHI
JUDGE