[2021] KEHC 3303 (KLR)
The court determined that the continued collection of rent by some beneficiaries without distribution to all was inequitable and contrary to the purpose of succession proceedings. The administration of the estate had been unduly prolonged, and it was necessary to bring it to a close by distributing the remaining...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEHC 3303 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Lucy Gumo; Applicant: Alice Gumo; Applicant: Anna Adhiambo Gumo; Applicant: Mary Catherine Oduol Gumo; Applicant: Christine Karaganai; Applicant: Emelda Apiyo Imanda; Applicant: Emily Gumo; Applicant: Enrico Gumo; Applicant: Francesca Wafula; Applicant: Julia Akona; Applicant: Jullietta Lutta; Applicant: Lilian Magero; Applicant: Nelly Openda; Applicant: Rosemary Gumo; Applicant: Susan Gumo; Applicant: Wilfreda Gumo; Respondent: Margaret Sikukuu Gumo; Respondent: Oliver Magero Gumo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 350 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Distribution of Estate Assets
- Outcome
- Application allowed. Orders granted for valuation, sale, and equal distribution of proceeds among beneficiaries.
- Judges
- LK Kimaru
- Legal Topics
- Succession of Estates, Distribution of Estate Assets, Valuation of Property, Equal Sharing Among Beneficiaries
- 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
Lucy Gumo
Applicant
Alice Gumo
Applicant
Anna Adhiambo Gumo
Applicant
Mary Catherine Oduol Gumo
Applicant
Christine Karaganai
Applicant
Emelda Apiyo Imanda
Applicant
Emily Gumo
Applicant
Enrico Gumo
Applicant
Francesca Wafula
Applicant
Julia Akona
Applicant
Jullietta Lutta
Applicant
Lilian Magero
Applicant
Nelly Openda
Applicant
Rosemary Gumo
Applicant
Susan Gumo
Applicant
Wilfreda Gumo
Applicant
Margaret Sikukuu Gumo
Respondent
Oliver Magero Gumo
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Distribution of Estate Assets
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the remaining commercial assets of the deceased's estate should be liquidated and the proceeds shared equally among all beneficiaries.
- 2 Whether the beneficiaries currently collecting rent from the properties are required to account for and distribute such income to all beneficiaries.
- 3 Whether the estate administration should be brought to a close by distributing the undistributed assets.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that the continued collection of rent by some beneficiaries without distribution to all was inequitable and contrary to the purpose of succession proceedings. The administration of the estate had been unduly prolonged, and it was necessary to bring it to a close by distributing the remaining assets. The court found that the only fair and practical solution was to value the properties, allow beneficiaries the first option to purchase at the ascertained value, and, if not purchased, to sell the properties by public auction. The proceeds from the sale, including those from shares, were to be distributed equally among all beneficiaries. This approach ensures equality,...
Court Disposition
Application allowed. Orders granted for valuation, sale, and equal distribution of proceeds among beneficiaries.
Orders
- All listed properties and shares shall be valued by a valuer agreed upon by the parties, with costs of valuation borne equally.
- Valuation reports to be submitted to court within 45 days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
47 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE
SUCCESSION CAUUSE NO. 350 OF 1998
IN THE ESTATE OF PIUS MAGERO GUMO – DECEASED
LUCY GUMO
ALICE GUMO
ANNA ADHIAMBO GUMO
MARY CATHERINE ODUOL GUMO
CHRISTINE KARAGANAI
EMELDA APIYO IMANDA
EMILY GUMO
ENRICO GUMO
FRANCESCA WAFULA
JULIA AKONA
JULLIETTA LUTTA
LILIAN MAGERO
NELLY OPENDA
ROSEMARY GUMO
SUSAN GUMO
WILFREDA GUMO....................................................................APPLICANTS
VERSUS
MARGARET SIKUKUU GUMO......................................1ST PETITIONER
OLIVER MAGERO GUMO..............................................2ND PETITIONER
RULING
This is a protracted Succession dispute - at least for now there appears to be light at the end of the tunnel. Applicants, who are the daughters of the deceased, have applied to this court for the following order:
“THAT this Honorable Court hereby distributes the commercial assets listed below by liquidating them and the proceeds be shared equally among the beneficiaries.
a) LR No. 12138/7 Nairobi
b) LR No. 209/1498/12 Nairobi
c) LR No. 2116/30/10 Kitale Municipality
d) LR No. 2116/20/10 Kitale Municipality
e) LR No. 2116/7/IV Kitale Municipality
Shares
f) Share certificate for 2196 shares A/C No. 002xxxxx
g) Share certificate for 300 shares, Barclays Bank (K) Ltd.
h) Share certificate for 1,155 shares Standard Chartered Bank A/C No. 008xxx.”
The application is supported by the annexed affidavit of Catherine Oduol Gumo. The application was not opposed by the majority of the beneficiaries. However, Charles Gumo swore an affidavit in opposition to the Application.
The plain reading of the application, the supporting affidavit and the replying affidavit clearly shows that there are some of the beneficiaries who are enjoying the status quo by collecting rents from the said properties. There is no evidence that upon collection of the said rent, the same has been distributed to all he beneficiaries. The administration of the estate of deceased’s persons must inevitably come to an end. The beneficiaries cannot be joined in the hip by being tied to an undistributed property of the deceased in perpetuity; at some point all the properties of the deceased must be distributed to the beneficiaries irrespective of the wishes of some of the beneficiaries who wish to maintain the status quo.
In the present case, it was evident to this court that the time to wind up this estate has arrived. Part of the winding up process is to distribute the remaining assets that comprise the undistributed estate of the deceased to the beneficiaries. It is in light of the foregoing observation that this court agrees with the Applicants that the undistributed properties must be sold and thereafter the proceeds therefrom be distributed equally among all the beneficiaries.
To achieve this objective, this court issues the following orders:
i) The said properties shall each be valued by a valuer to be agreed by the parties to this application. The cost of valuation shall be borne equally by the parties to the application.
ii) After the valuation, the valuation report shall be submitted to court. The court shall ascertain the value after which any interested beneficiary shall have the first option to purchase the property. The purchase consideration realized from such sale shall be deposited in an escrow account to be maintained by the Advocates of the parties to this application.
iii) If none of the beneficiaries shall be able to pay the ascertained purchase consideration, the remainder of the properties shall be advertised for sale and the same shall be sold in a public auction subject to the reserve price which shall be the ascertained value of the particular property.
iv) The valuation exercise shall be undertaken and reports submitted to court within 45 days of today’s date.
v) Since this is a family dispute, there shall be no order as to costs.
DATED AT KITALE THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021.
L. KIMARU
JUDGE