[2019] KEHC 7542 (KLR)

[2019] KEHC 7542 (KLR)

The court found that the proposed distribution by the administrators was not supported by any credible explanation or evidence of the deceased's wishes. The alleged instructions from the deceased could not be verified, and there was no proof that Augustino Maitima had benefited inter vivos. The court held that,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] KEHC 7542 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Domisiano Mbaya Ikandi; Applicant: Justine Kathambi Maitima; Respondent: Patrick Mutethia
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Meru
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 5 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate
Outcome
The court ordered that the estate be distributed equally among the beneficiaries in accordance with the law of succession.
Legal Topics
Intestate Succession, Distribution of Estate, Confirmation of Grant
Source Language
en
Family and Children Intestate Succession Distribution of Estate Confirmation of Grant

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Domisiano Mbaya Ikandi

Applicant

Justine Kathambi Maitima

Applicant

Patrick Mutethia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate

  1. 1 Whether the proposed mode of distribution of the deceased's estate is fair and in accordance with the law of succession.
  2. 2 Whether the family of Augustino Maitima (represented by Patrick Mutethia) is entitled to an equal share in the estate.
  3. 3 Whether the wishes allegedly expressed by the deceased or clan elders should influence the distribution of the estate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the proposed distribution by the administrators was not supported by any credible explanation or evidence of the deceased's wishes. The alleged instructions from the deceased could not be verified, and there was no proof that Augustino Maitima had benefited inter vivos. The court held that, since the deceased died intestate and the two daughters had renounced their rights, the estate should be distributed equally among the remaining beneficiaries in accordance with section 35(5) of the Law of Succession Act. The court rejected the unequal distribution and directed that the estate be shared equally unless the beneficiaries agree otherwise.

Court Disposition

The court ordered that the estate be distributed equally among the beneficiaries in accordance with the law of succession.

Orders

  • The estate of the deceased shall be distributed equally among the beneficiaries as per section 35(5) of the Law of Succession Act, unless the beneficiaries agree otherwise.
  • The renunciation of rights by the two daughters is respected and they shall not receive a share.