[2015] KEHC 1611 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 1611 (KLR)

The court held that the applicant's grievances pertained to the distribution of the estate and not to any defect in the process of obtaining the grant or the administration of the estate. As such, the application did not meet the threshold for revocation under Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. The appropriate...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 1611 (KLR)
Parties
Respondent: John Kamau Marigi; Respondent: Stephen Njoroge Gachuhi; Applicant: __MISSING__
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 906 of 1997
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant
Outcome
application dismissed with costs
Judges
DN Musyoka
Legal Topics
Revocation of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Confirmation of Grant
Source Language
en
Family and Children Revocation of Grant 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

John Kamau Marigi

Respondent

Stephen Njoroge Gachuhi

Respondent

__MISSING__

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has established grounds for revocation of grant under Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act.
  2. 2 Whether dissatisfaction with the mode of distribution of the estate is a valid ground for revocation of grant.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the applicant's grievances pertained to the distribution of the estate and not to any defect in the process of obtaining the grant or the administration of the estate. As such, the application did not meet the threshold for revocation under Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. The appropriate remedy for dissatisfaction with distribution is to seek review of the confirmation orders or to appeal, not to apply for revocation of the grant. Consequently, the application for revocation was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application dated 29th April 1997 is dismissed with costs.
  • The court file in Murang’a CMCSC No. 205 of 1993 is to be returned to the Murang’a Law Courts for further handling by the High Court there.