[2016] KEHC 1254 (KLR)
The court held that the applicant lacked locus standi to bring the application for revocation of grant because he did not possess a grant of representation for his deceased father's estate. Without such a grant, he had no legal capacity to litigate on behalf of the estate. Furthermore, the court found that the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2016] KEHC 1254 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Samuel Githua Njoroge; Respondent: Mwangi Kaburu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Murang'a
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 1271 of 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application for Revocation of Grant
- Outcome
- Application struck out with costs to the respondent.
- Judges
- DW Mbuteti
- Legal Topics
- Locus Standi, Revocation of Grant, Sale of Land, Representation of Estate
- 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
Samuel Githua Njoroge
Applicant
Mwangi Kaburu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Preliminary Objection and Application for Revocation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant has locus standi to seek revocation of grant on behalf of his deceased father.
- 2 Whether the applicant's claim based on a contract of sale of land can be adjudicated in succession proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the applicant lacked locus standi to bring the application for revocation of grant because he did not possess a grant of representation for his deceased father's estate. Without such a grant, he had no legal capacity to litigate on behalf of the estate. Furthermore, the court found that the applicant's claim was based on a contract of sale of land, which is a civil matter that cannot be determined within the limited scope of succession proceedings. The court's mandate in succession matters is confined to identifying beneficiaries and distributing the estate, not resolving contractual disputes. Consequently, the application for revocation of grant was misconceived and...
Court Disposition
Application struck out with costs to the respondent.
Orders
- The summons dated 28/11/2013 for revocation of grant is struck out.
- Costs awarded to the Administrator/Respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MURANG’A
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO 1271 OF 2013
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF WAMUMBU MUTHOTHO DECEASED
SAMUEL GITHUA NJOROGE...................................................APPLICANT
VERSUS
MWANGI KABURU................................ADMINISTRATOR/RESPONDENT
R U L I N G
1. The Applicant herein, Samuel Githua Njoroge, applied by summons dated 28/11/2013 for revocation or annulment of the grant of letters of administration intestate issued on 05/08/1007 in Murang’a SRM Succession Cause No 26 of 1997. The grant was confirmed and a certificate of confirmation of grant dated 14/10/1997 issued.
2. It turns out that the Applicant’s claim in the Deceased’s estate is that his father Gabriel Njoroge Mbiro, had bought from the Deceased two (2) acres in the Deceased’s parcel of land, Loc 20/Mirira/1776. He does not state in his supporting affidavit when the purchase was made. His father is now deceased.
3. The Administrator responded to the application by filing a notice of preliminary objection dated 16/11/2015. The points of law raised are that the Applicant lacks the locus standi to institute the application for revocation, and further, that the claim that he is urging in the application is a civil right, not a succession matter, that can be enforced only in civil court.
4. At the hearing of the preliminary objection the Applicant conceded that he did not have any grant of representation in respect to his father’s estate. His father died in 1998. He also stated that the land that his father bought from the Deceased was agricultural land, and that there was no land control consent obtained.
5. Without a grant of representation duly granted by a competent court of law, the Applicant has no capacity or locus standi to litigate on behalf of his deceased father’s estate,
6. Secondly, the claim of the Applicant’s father’s estate in the Deceased’s estate is based on a contract of sale of land. Issues pertaining to that contract of sale cannot be properly adjudicated in limited succession proceedings where the court’s main mandate extends only to determining the persons beneficially entitled to a deceased person’s estate and their respective shares therein.
7. The summons dated 28/11/2013 for revocation of grant is therefore entirely misconceived. It is hereby struck out with costs to the Administrator/Respondent. It is so ordered.
DATED AND SIGNED AT MURANG’A THIS 19TH DAY OF MAY 2016
H P G WAWERU
JUDGE
DELIVERED AT MURANG’A THIS 20TH DAY OF MAY 2016