[2018] KEHC 7581 (KLR)
The court found that Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Court lacked the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the succession cause, as the value of the estate exceeded its statutory limit of KShs. 8,000,000. The High Court, acting under Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act, determined that it had the authority to...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2018] KEHC 7581 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Joseph Kamau Waithira; Respondent: Peter Mugo Rupia
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Machakos
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Civil Application 6 of 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit
- Outcome
- application allowed
- Legal Topics
- Transfer of Suit, Pecuniary Jurisdiction, Probate and Administration, Court Jurisdiction
- 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
Joseph Kamau Waithira
Applicant
Peter Mugo Rupia
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Transfer of Suit
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the High Court should transfer Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Succession Cause No. 19 of 2016 to Machakos Chief Magistrates Court for hearing and determination.
- 2 Whether Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Court has the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Court lacked the requisite pecuniary jurisdiction to hear the succession cause, as the value of the estate exceeded its statutory limit of KShs. 8,000,000. The High Court, acting under Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act, determined that it had the authority to transfer the suit to a competent court, even in the absence of notice to the respondent. The court emphasized the need to ensure that the estate is properly and promptly administered for the benefit of the beneficiaries, and that no prejudice would be suffered by the respondent as a result of the transfer. Accordingly, the application for transfer was allowed to facilitate the...
Court Disposition
application allowed
Orders
- Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Succession Cause No. 19 of 2016 is transferred to Machakos Chief Magistrates Court for hearing and determination.
- Costs shall be in the cause.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MACHAKOS
MISCELLENOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2017
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF RUPIA MACHARIA (DECEASED)
JOSEPH KAMAU WAITHIRA……………....…………………..APPLICANT
VERSUS
PETER MUGO RUPIA…………………………..……………RESPONDENT
RULING
1. The Applicant herein has filed a summons dated 18th September, 2017 under section 18, 3A and 4 of the Civil Procedure Act. He seeks orders that Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Succession Cause No. 19 of 2016 be transferred to Machakos Chief Magistrates Court for hearing and determination.
2. The motion is based on the grounds that the deceased’s estate is valued at over KShs. 10,000,000/- which sum is above the pecuniary jurisdiction of Kithimani Principal Magistrate’s Court which is currently KShs. 8, 000,000/-.
3. Section 18 of the Civil Procedure Act provides:
“On an application of any of the parties and after notice to the parties and after hearing such of them as desire to be heard, or of its motion without such notice, the High Court may at any stage-
(a) Transfer any suit, appeal or other proceeding pending before it for trial
(b) or disposal to any court subordinate to it and competent to try or dispose of the same.
4. I have considered the Applicant’s Application aforesaid as well as the affidavit in support thereof. I note that the Applicant has not indicated whether or not the Respondent had been served with the said Application. However that notwithstanding, I find that this court has power on its own motion without any notice being served to parties to transfer any suit pending before it to other court subordinate to it to transfer such suits for the purposes of hearing and disposal. The Applicant has already disclosed that Kithimani court seems not to have the requisite jurisdiction to try the matter since the value of the estate is estimated to be over Kshs.10 million and that the said court’s pecuniary jurisdiction has been disclosed to be Kshs. 8 million. It has also been indicated that the said court has declined to entertain the suit on ground of jurisdiction. That being the position and the need to fasttrack the matter herein, I find the request for transfer of suit merited. No prejudice will be suffered by the Respondent if the suit is transferred. There is need to ensure the estate of the deceased is properly and promptly administered for the benefit of the beneficiaries. In this regard the justice of the case and the provisions of Sections 18, 3A of the Civil Procedure Act as well as Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules demand that the Application be allowed.
5. In the result the Applicant’s Application dated 18/09/2017 is allowed in terms of prayer 1 thereof. Costs shall be in the cause.
It is so ordered.
Dated and delivered in Machakos this 13th day of March, 2018.
D.K.KEMEI
JUDGE
In the presence of:-
No appearance for Kanui - for the Applicant
No appearance - for the Respondent
Kituva - Court Assistant