[2020] KEHC 7483 (KLR)

[2020] KEHC 7483 (KLR)

The court found that the issues raised by the applicants had already been litigated by their mothers (the 2nd and 3rd widows) in a previous application, which was determined by Aroni J in the ruling dated 3rd November 2016. The confirmed grant of 22nd February 2012, as rectified, remained the operative instrument...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] KEHC 7483 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Susan Akhulunya Mangwana; Respondent: Judith Mangwana; Respondent: Jackline Mavia Mangwana; Respondent: Jeretina Nawinyi; Respondent: Ruth Aponyo Mangwana; Respondent: Vivian Mangwana; Respondent: Elizabeth Tsische Mangwana; Respondent: Sarah Akinyi Mangwana
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Probate & Administration 93 of 2003
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Ruling on Applications for Revocation of Grant and for Execution of Distribution
Outcome
Application for revocation of grant dismissed; application for execution of distribution allowed with directions.
Judges
SN Riechi
Legal Topics
Succession, Grant Revocation, Estate Distribution, Co Administration
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Succession Grant Revocation Estate Distribution Co Administration

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

Parties

Susan Akhulunya Mangwana

Applicant

Judith Mangwana

Respondent

Jackline Mavia Mangwana

Respondent

Jeretina Nawinyi

Respondent

Ruth Aponyo Mangwana

Respondent

Vivian Mangwana

Respondent

Elizabeth Tsische Mangwana

Respondent

Sarah Akinyi Mangwana

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Probate and Administration / Ruling on Applications for Revocation of Grant and for Execution of Distribution

  1. 1 Whether the certificate of confirmation of grant issued on 22/2/2012 should be revoked or annulled.
  2. 2 Whether the applicants (children of the 2nd and 3rd widows) were unfairly excluded from the distribution of the estate.
  3. 3 Whether the estate should be redistributed to include the applicants as beneficiaries.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the issues raised by the applicants had already been litigated by their mothers (the 2nd and 3rd widows) in a previous application, which was determined by Aroni J in the ruling dated 3rd November 2016. The confirmed grant of 22nd February 2012, as rectified, remained the operative instrument for distribution. The applicants, being children of the respective houses, were entitled to their shares through their mothers' allocations, and their exclusion from the direct distribution did not amount to unfairness or illegality. The application for revocation of the grant was therefore res judicata and dismissed. Regarding the execution of the distribution, the court held...

Court Disposition

Application for revocation of grant dismissed; application for execution of distribution allowed with directions.

Orders

  • The application dated 22.6.2017 for revocation or annulment of the certificate of confirmation of grant is dismissed.
  • Susan Akhulunya Mangwana, Elizabeth Tsische Mangwana, and Sarah Akinyi Mangwana are directed to jointly sign the necessary documents for distribution within 30 days.