[2025] KEHC 6956 (KLR)
The court found that the administrators had failed to comply with previous directions regarding the appointment of valuers and the sale of estate property to finance the valuation. The 1st, 3rd, and 4th administrators made a clear proposal for the sale of a specific property, while the 2nd administrator's position...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 6956 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: James Kiprotich Biagon; Respondent: Christopher Kiptoo Towett; Applicant: Peter Kiptoo Tanui; Applicant: Anna Kamaya Towett
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nakuru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 189 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Compliance With Court Directions Regarding Valuation and Sale of Estate Property
- Outcome
- Non-compliance noted; administrators directed to resolve impasse or face revocation of grant or other legal measures.
- Judges
- JM Nang'ea
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates, Appointment of Administrators, Valuation of Estate Assets, Sale of Estate Property
- 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
James Kiprotich Biagon
Applicant
Christopher Kiptoo Towett
Respondent
Peter Kiptoo Tanui
Applicant
Anna Kamaya Towett
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Compliance With Court Directions Regarding Valuation and Sale of Estate Property
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the administrators have complied with previous court directions regarding appointment of valuers for the estate.
- 2 Which property of the deceased's estate should be sold to finance the valuation exercise.
- 3 Whether the court should intervene in identifying the property to be sold or leave it to the administrators.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the administrators had failed to comply with previous directions regarding the appointment of valuers and the sale of estate property to finance the valuation. The 1st, 3rd, and 4th administrators made a clear proposal for the sale of a specific property, while the 2nd administrator's position was unclear. The court held that it is not its role to identify which property should be sold; this responsibility lies with the administrators. If the administrators do not resolve the impasse and comply with the court's directions, the court may revoke the grant or take other appropriate legal measures to ensure the estate is properly administered and the file is closed.
Court Disposition
Non-compliance noted; administrators directed to resolve impasse or face revocation of grant or other legal measures.
Orders
- Administrators to agree and comply with previous court directions regarding appointment of valuers and sale of property to finance valuation.
- Failure to comply may result in revocation of the grant or other appropriate legal measures.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
In re Estate of Towett Taita (Deceased) (Succession Cause 189 of 2011) [2025] KEHC 6956 (KLR) (26 May 2025) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 6956 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Nakuru
Succession Cause 189 of 2011
JM Nang'ea, J
May 26, 2025
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE TT (DECEASED)
In the matter of
James Kiprotich Biagon
1st Administrator
Christopher Kiptoo Towett
2nd Administrator
Peter Kiptoo Tanui
3rd Administrator
Anna Kamaya Towett
4th Administrator
Ruling
1. On the 16th December 2024 my brother (H. M. Nyaga, Judge) issued various directions and/or orders herein which include the following;-i.That the Joint Administrators do propose an expert to identify and value the land comprising the deceased’s estate. If there is no agreement on a joint valuer, the 2nd House of the deceased represented by the 2nd Administrator may appoint their own valuer.ii.The 2nd Administrator was directed to appoint their own valuer within 14 days if there was no consensus on a joint valuer, and thereafter the respective valuers would file their reports in court within 30 days of their appointment.And;iii.It was further directed that the Administrators do agree on sale of one of the properties of the deceased to finance the valuation exercise.
2. When the matter later came for mention on 19th February 2025 it transpired that the Court’s directions had not been complied with, the 1st, 3rd and 4th Administrators attributing the stalemate to the 2nd Administrator.
3. The 2nd Administrator responded that he had in fact given his proposals on the way forward vide his affidavit filed on 27th August, 2024. He in turn blames his Co-Administrators for the lack of progress.
4. The Court then asked the 1st, 2nd and 4h Administrators to give their proposals on the arising issues for the Court’s consideration alongside the 2nd Administrator’s opinion. This Ruling is given upon consideration of the respective proposals.
5. I have perused the parties’ proposals. The 1st, 3rd and 4th Administrators suggest sale of 10 acres of Title No. IR 50376 Survey Plan No. 138307 to cater for the valuation expenses. They are opposed to disposition of Title No. Njoro/Ngata Block 2/464 as suggested by the 2nd Administrator for the reasons that it is where the remains of the deceased are interred and further that it is too small, particularly after curving out the portion that bears the deceased’s grave.
6. I have read through the 2nd Administrator’s affidavit sworn on 27th August 2024 which he appears to rely on as stating his proposals regarding the matter. I am unable to discern his specific proposals on appointment of a Valuer and/or which property comprising the deceased’s estate he prefers to be sold to cater for valuation expenses.
7. The Court cannot identify property for sale on behalf of the parties. It is upto the Administrators to ensure completion of the process of transmission of the deceased estate or their Grant is revoked and/or other appropriate legal measures taken to ensure closure of this file.
RULING DELIVERED THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2025 IN THE PRESENCE OF:J. M. NANG’EA, JUDGE.1st, 3rd and 4th Administrators’ Advocate, Ms Ndeda2nd Administrator, Present in PersonThe Court Assistant (Jeniffer)