[2020] KEHC 2533 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 2533 (KLR)

The court found that the Objector, as a biological daughter of the deceased, was unlawfully excluded from the distribution of the deceased's estate. The Petitioners' argument that the Objector had already benefited from a property transferred to her husband prior to the deceased's death was rejected, as the property...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 2533 (KLR)
Parties
Respondent: Florence Achieng Okola; Respondent: Nicholas Juma Okola; Applicant: Rosedalima Akwiri Ndong’
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kisumu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 623 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Objection allowed. Orders granted in favour of the Objector.
Judges
TW Cherere
Legal Topics
Succession of Estates, Distribution of Intestate Estate, Polygamous Families, Revocation of Grant, Rectification of Register
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Succession of Estates Distribution of Intestate Estate Polygamous Families Revocation of Grant Rectification of Register

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Florence Achieng Okola

Respondent

Nicholas Juma Okola

Respondent

Rosedalima Akwiri Ndong’

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the Objector was unlawfully excluded from the distribution of the deceased's estate.
  2. 2 Whether the grant and certificate of confirmation should be annulled or revoked due to non-disclosure of a beneficiary.
  3. 3 Whether the Objector is entitled to a share of LR. NO. KISUMU/KORU/1277.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Objector, as a biological daughter of the deceased, was unlawfully excluded from the distribution of the deceased's estate. The Petitioners' argument that the Objector had already benefited from a property transferred to her husband prior to the deceased's death was rejected, as the property was not settled on the Objector herself and thus did not constitute a prior benefit under section 42 of the Law of Succession Act. The court held that, under section 40 of the Act, the estate should have been distributed equally among all children and the surviving widow. Since a significant portion of the estate had already been sold to third parties, the court determined...

Court Disposition

Objection allowed. Orders granted in favour of the Objector.

Orders

  • The Objector is entitled to 8.505 Ha of the deceased's estate.
  • The 8.505 Ha share shall be hived out of LR. NO. KISUMU/KORU/2316, LR. NO. KISUMU/KORU/2317, LR. NO. KISUMU/KORU/2129 and LR NO. KISUMU/KORU/2130 registered in the name of Florence Achieng Okola, Nicholas Ouma Okola and Philip Odhiambo Okalo.