[2021] KEHC 13458 (KLR)

[2021] KEHC 13458 (KLR)

The court found that since the applicants were not served with the application for revocation of grant, the orders revoking the grant and setting aside the certificate of confirmation were set aside. The application for revocation is thus reinstated, and the applicants are now given an opportunity to respond to it....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] KEHC 13458 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Rose Wanjiku Muite; Applicant: Samuel Karanja Mwathi; Applicant: Justus Kuria Mwathi; Applicant: Frederick Chege Mwathi; Applicant: Catherine Wairimu Mwathi; Respondent: Timothy Joe Mwathi Njeri; Respondent: Collins Ndegwa Njeri; Respondent: Eva Ann Wangui Njeri
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 2668 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Interlocutory Application; Directions on Response to Revocation Application
Outcome
Application adjourned; applicants granted leave to respond to revocation application.
Judges
AO Muchelule
Legal Topics
Succession, Grant Revocation, Service of Process, Beneficiary Rights
Source Language
en
Family and Children Succession Grant Revocation Service of Process Beneficiary Rights

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rose Wanjiku Muite

Applicant

Samuel Karanja Mwathi

Applicant

Justus Kuria Mwathi

Applicant

Frederick Chege Mwathi

Applicant

Catherine Wairimu Mwathi

Applicant

Timothy Joe Mwathi Njeri

Respondent

Collins Ndegwa Njeri

Respondent

Eva Ann Wangui Njeri

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Interlocutory Application; Directions on Response to Revocation Application

  1. 1 Whether the respondents were entitled to participate in the petition and distribution of the deceased's estate.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were properly served with the application for revocation of grant.
  3. 3 Whether the orders revoking the grant should be set aside for lack of service.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that since the applicants were not served with the application for revocation of grant, the orders revoking the grant and setting aside the certificate of confirmation were set aside. The application for revocation is thus reinstated, and the applicants are now given an opportunity to respond to it. The court emphasized the necessity of service and participation of all interested parties in succession proceedings to ensure substantive justice. The applicants and their siblings are granted 21 days to respond to the application for revocation, after which the matter will proceed for directions. No orders as to costs were made.

Court Disposition

Application adjourned; applicants granted leave to respond to revocation application.

Orders

  • Applicants and their siblings to respond to the application for revocation within 21 days.
  • Matter to be mentioned on 7th December 2021 for directions on hearing.