[2024] KEHC 15969 (KLR)
The court found that the application to amend the order of 11th December, 2020 lacked merit because the title to the parcel of land in question, Kericho/Kabartegan/335, had already been closed upon subdivision as of 6th March, 2015. As such, there was no existing title that could be transferred to the objector,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KEHC 15969 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Jonah Kipkurui Sigei; Petitioner: Erick Kipkorir Sigei; Petitioner: Reuben Kiprotich Sigei; Objector: Esther Chepkemoi Chumo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 157 of 2012
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Amend Prior Order
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Judges
- JK Sergon
- Legal Topics
- Distribution of Estate, Beneficiary Rights, Amendment of Court Orders, Land Transfer, Succession Disputes
- 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
Jonah Kipkurui Sigei
Petitioner
Erick Kipkorir Sigei
Petitioner
Reuben Kiprotich Sigei
Petitioner
Esther Chepkemoi Chumo
Objector
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Notice of Motion to Amend Prior Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should amend its order of 11th December, 2020 to direct transfer of Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the objector instead of the petitioners.
- 2 Whether the objector is entitled to a share of the estate, specifically parcel Kericho/Kabartegan/335.
- 3 Whether the order sought can be granted where the title to the subject parcel has been closed upon subdivision.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the application to amend the order of 11th December, 2020 lacked merit because the title to the parcel of land in question, Kericho/Kabartegan/335, had already been closed upon subdivision as of 6th March, 2015. As such, there was no existing title that could be transferred to the objector, rendering the order sought incapable of being granted. The court emphasized that it cannot issue orders in respect of non-existent legal interests. Consequently, the application was dismissed. Given the familial nature of the dispute, the court further ordered that each party should bear their own costs to promote fairness and minimize further conflict among the parties.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The notice of motion dated 18th June, 2024 is dismissed.
- Each party shall bear their own costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
In re Kipsigei Arap Chumo alias Kipsige Arap Chumo (Deceased) (Succession Cause 157 of 2012) [2024] KEHC 15969 (KLR) (18 December 2024) (Ruling)
Neutral citation: [2024] KEHC 15969 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kericho
Succession Cause 157 of 2012
JK Sergon, J
December 18, 2024
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KIPSIGEI ARAP CHUMO alias KIPSIGE ARAP CHUMO (DECEASED)
Between
Jonah Kipkurui Sigei
1st Petitioner
Erick Kipkorir Sigei
2nd Petitioner
Reuben Kiprotich Sigei
3rd Petitioner
and
Esther Chepkemoi Chumo
Objector
Ruling
1. The application combining up for hearing is a notice of motion dated 18th June, 2024 seeking the following orders;(i)That the Applicant be allowed to amend the order dated 11th December, 2020 issued by this Honourable Court.(ii)That order being directed to the Deputy Registrar Kericho Law Courts to transfer the land parcels Kericho/Kabartegan/331, Kericho/Kabartegan/56 and Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the Respondents be changed and re-issue an order directing the Deputy Registrar Kericho High Court to transfer the land parcel Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the Applicant herein upon payment of the requisite fees.(iii)That costs of the application be in the cause.
2. The application is based on the grounds stated on the face of it and the facts deponed in the supporting affidavit of Esther Chepkemoi Chumo the Objector/Applicant herein and one of the beneficiaries of the estate of the deceased.
3. She stated that the Respondents are her brothers who subdivided and shared the properties of their late father excluding her.
4. She avers that on 11th December, 2020, the Respondents filed an application under a certificate of urgency seeking to compel the Land Registrar-Kericho County to remove the caveat placed on the parcels of land known as Kericho/Kabartegan/331, Kericho/Kabartegan/56 and Kericho/Kabartegan/335 and execute transfer documents in favour of the Respondents on her behalf.
5. She avers that on 11th December, 2020 this Honourable Court issued an order directing the Deputy Registrar to transfer Kericho/Kabartegan/331, Kericho/Kabartegan/56 and Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the Respondents.
6. She avers that the Respondents wanted to disinherit her without any reasonable cause.
7. She also stated that the Respondents have refused to give her a share in the estate of the deceased and unless an order is re-issued directing the Deputy Registrar to transfer land parcel known as Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to her name she will suffer irreparable loss and damage.
8. When the matter came up for inter partes hearing, Mr. Bii the Learned Counsel for the Objector/Applicant submitted that the application was served and there was no response. The Petitioners/Respondents were appeared in person. This court directed the parties to exchange and file their written submissions.
9. Despite having been served with the instant Application, the Petitioners/Respondents did not deem it fit to file a response to the same. None of the parties filed written submissions as directed by the Court.
10. I have already set out the arguments put forward by the applicant. She is basically beseeching this Court to amend the Order issued on 11th December, 2020 directing the Deputy Registrar of this Court to transfer the Parcels of land known as Kericho/Kabartegan/331, Kericho/Kabartegan/56 and Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the Petitioners/Respondents be changed and substituted with an order directing the Deputy Registrar to instead transfer the Parcel of land known as Kericho/Kabartegan/335 to the Objector/Applicant.
11. I have examined the Court record and it is apparent that title to the Parcel of Land known as Kericho/Kabartegan/335 was closed upon subdivision on 6th March, 2015 as indicated in annexture marked ‘ECC1’. Therefore, the order sought cannot be issued since it seeks to transfer a non-existent title.
12. In the end, this court finds that the aforesaid motion lacks merit. The same is hereby ordered dismissed. Since this dispute involves members of the same family, therefore a fair order on costs is that each party should bear their own costs.
DELIVERED, SIGNED AND DATED AT KERICHO THIS 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024. ……………………………J.K. SERGONJUDGEIn the Presence of:-C/Assistant – RutohNo Appearance