[1998] KEHC 92 (KLR)

[1998] KEHC 92 (KLR)

The court found that the applicant, despite being a relative entitled under Section 39 of the Law of Succession Act, failed to prosecute his succession cause for over 20 years and provided no sufficient reason for this inaction. The respondent's family had occupied the land for decades with the knowledge and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1998] KEHC 92 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Benson Mugweru Kaguongo; Respondent: Cyrus Muriuki Murathi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Civil Case 2080 of 1995
Procedural Posture
Objection Application / Ruling on Application to Revoke Grant of Letters of Administration
Outcome
objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Revocation of Grant, Letters of Administration, Adverse Possession, Succession Rights, Locus Standi, Delay and Laches
Source Language
en
Land and Property Civil Procedure Revocation of Grant Letters of Administration Adverse Possession Succession Rights Locus Standi Delay and Laches

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benson Mugweru Kaguongo

Applicant

Cyrus Muriuki Murathi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Objection Application / Ruling on Application to Revoke Grant of Letters of Administration

  1. 1 Whether the respondent obtained the grant of letters of administration to Munyi Kangara's estate fraudulently or by concealing material facts.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's long delay and inaction extinguished his right to the estate.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent or his family had a legitimate claim to the suit land by virtue of occupation, relationship, or adverse possession.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant, despite being a relative entitled under Section 39 of the Law of Succession Act, failed to prosecute his succession cause for over 20 years and provided no sufficient reason for this inaction. The respondent's family had occupied the land for decades with the knowledge and acquiescence of the applicant's family, and the applicant took no steps to remove them during the relevant period. The respondent lawfully obtained a confirmed grant and subdivided the land, which was subsequently transferred to third parties who took possession without notice of any legal impediment. The applicant's long silence and delay amounted to abandonment or extinguishment of...

Court Disposition

objection dismissed

Orders

  • The objection proceedings are dismissed.
  • Each party shall bear their own costs.