[2016] KEHC 685 (KLR)
The court determined that since the two applications filed by the applicant raise cross-cutting issues, it would be an improper use of judicial time to hear them separately. Furthermore, the Preliminary Objection filed by the respondents is closely related to the subject matter of the applications. Therefore, in the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 685 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mary Kitengele Kamolo; Respondent: Timothy Nzioki Ndambuki; Respondent: Francis Muoki Kamolo; Respondent: Beatrice Kamene Nzuve
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 607 of 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Sequencing of Applications and Preliminary Objection
- Outcome
- Applications and Preliminary Objection to be heard together.
- Judges
- DO Ogembo
- Legal Topics
- Succession Procedure, Estate Administration, Application Sequencing
- 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
Mary Kitengele Kamolo
Applicant
Timothy Nzioki Ndambuki
Respondent
Francis Muoki Kamolo
Respondent
Beatrice Kamene Nzuve
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Sequencing of Applications and Preliminary Objection
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Chamber Summons dated 14th October, 2014 and 12th October, 2016 should be heard together or separately.
- 2 Whether the Preliminary Objection filed on 15th November, 2016 should be determined together with the applications.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that since the two applications filed by the applicant raise cross-cutting issues, it would be an improper use of judicial time to hear them separately. Furthermore, the Preliminary Objection filed by the respondents is closely related to the subject matter of the applications. Therefore, in the interest of judicial economy and to avoid duplication of proceedings, all the applications and the Preliminary Objection should be heard and determined together.
Court Disposition
Applications and Preliminary Objection to be heard together.
Orders
- The Chamber Summons dated 14th October, 2014 and 12th October, 2016, and the Preliminary Objection filed on 15th November, 2016, shall be heard together.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 607 OF 2007
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF NATHAN KAMOLO NGALO – DECEASED
BETWEEN
MARY KITENGELE KAMOLO ………...…………..…APPLICANT
VERSUS
TIMOTHY NZIOKI NDAMBUKI ………………1ST RESPONDENT
FRANCIS MUOKI KAMOLO ……….………..2ND RESPONDENT
BEATRICE KAMENE NZUVE ……………..…3RD RESPONDENT
RULING OF THE COURT
On 15th November, 2016 this court reserved a ruling herein on direction as to which applications between the Chamber Summons dated 14th October, 2014and12th October, 2016 both filed by Mary Kitengele Kamolo should be heard first. I have looked at the nature of prayers in both applications. In my view the time of this court and of the parties would be served best if the two applications are heard together. The issues in both applications are cross cutting and it would be an improper use of time to hear the applications separately.
I have also looked at the Preliminary Objection filed by Mr. Kitulu on 15th November, 2016. The same should also be determined together with the said applications.
Orders accordingly.
DATED AND DELIVERED AT MACHAKOS THIS 24THDAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016.
E. OGOLA
JUDGE
In the presence of;
M/S Nzei for applicant
Mr. Mumbi for 2nd respondent
Mr. Mumbi holding brief for Kituku for 1st respondent
Court Assistant – Mr. Munyao