[2006] KEHC 1753 (KLR)
The court found that there was no valid will for the estate of Ruth Wanjiru Kimani, as previously determined by Etyang J. The estate, consisting solely of Muguga/Jet Scheme/377, must therefore be distributed as intestate property. The court accepted the consensus reached by the parties, including the advocate for...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2006] KEHC 1753 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Hannah Wanjiru Njogu; Respondent: George Mbuthia Kimani; Respondent: Hannah Njambi Kimani
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Case 2430 of 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Judgment on Summons for Confirmation of Grant
- Outcome
- Application for confirmation of grant allowed; estate to be distributed equally among five beneficiaries.
- Judges
- KH Rawal
- Legal Topics
- Intestate Succession, Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate, Beneficiary Entitlement
- 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
Hannah Wanjiru Njogu
Applicant
George Mbuthia Kimani
Respondent
Hannah Njambi Kimani
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment on Summons for Confirmation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the estate of Ruth Wanjiru Kimani should be distributed as per an alleged will or as an intestate estate.
- 2 How the sole asset of the estate should be distributed among the beneficiaries.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that there was no valid will for the estate of Ruth Wanjiru Kimani, as previously determined by Etyang J. The estate, consisting solely of Muguga/Jet Scheme/377, must therefore be distributed as intestate property. The court accepted the consensus reached by the parties, including the advocate for George Mbuthia Kimani, that the property should be divided equally among the five beneficiaries: the deceased's children and daughter-in-law. The certificate of confirmation of grant was ordered to be issued on this basis, ensuring equal distribution of the estate's sole asset.
Court Disposition
Application for confirmation of grant allowed; estate to be distributed equally among five beneficiaries.
Orders
- Certificate of confirmation of grant to be issued for Muguga/Jet Scheme/377, to be distributed equally among the five beneficiaries named in the supporting affidavit of the summons for confirmation dated 28th November, 2003.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
32 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI (NAIROBI LAW COURTS)
Succession Cause 2430 of 1996
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF RUTH WANJIRU KIMANI – DECEASED
JUDGMENT
Hannah Wanjiru Njogu one of the Administrators of the estate of the deceased herein brought in a summons for confirmation dated 28th November, 2003 and filed on 10th December, 2003.
After the said Hannah protested to the grant of administration to the co-administrator George Mbuthia Kimani and Hannah Njambi Kimani (a son and daughter of the deceased), an order of the court was made on 27th August, 2001 and a fresh grant was issued on 17th October, 2003 making George Mbuthia and Hannah Wanjiru Njogu as co-administrator.
Thereafter the application to confirm the said grant was made as aforesaid.
George Mbuthia, in his replying affidavit sworn on 27th February, 2004, has mentioned four beneficiaries leaving – Alice Njeri Chege a married daughter as a beneficiary. But Hannah has placed her name as a beneficiary.
George has thus proposed distribution as under.
George Mbuthia Kimani (son) – 2 acres
Hannah Njambi Kimani (daughter) – One acre
Hannah Wanjiru Njogu (daughter-in-law) – 2 acres
Janet Wanjiru Kimani (daughter) – 1 acre
Hannah has made following proposition
George Mbuthia Kimani – 2 acres
Hannah Wanjiru Njogu – 2 acres
Alice Njeri Chege - ? acre
Hannah Njambi Gitau - ? acre
Janet Wanjiku - ? acre
I also have an affidavit of protest sworn by Hannah Njambi Kimani on 20th January, 2005 she was an ex-administrator. In that affidavit she has suggested equal distribution amongst five dependants.
George has annexed a copy of Will of the deceased dated 11th October, 1993 addressed to the Chief Kikuyu Location through the area Assistant Chief Kerwa Sub-location.
However, in his ruling dated 27th August, 2001 Etyang J. has observed that there was no valid Will.
Thus I have to decide the application of confirmation of grant as an intestate estate.
At the time of hearing of the application of confirmation with the protest made by George, Mr. Kaai also stated that he has instruction to appear for George.
He submitted from the bar that despite the affidavit of 27th February, 2004, George who is his client has agreed to distribute the estate as per law and specified that the asset of the estate be divided equally amongst five beneficiaries of the deceased who were her children and daughter-in-law (Hannah the co-administrator).
As per the ruling of Etyang J., the only asset of the deceased was Muguga/Jet Scheme/377 only.
The certificate of confirmation then must be issued accordingly i.e. the aforesaid property be distributed equally amongst five beneficiaries mentioned in supporting affidavit of the summon for confirmation dated 28th November, 2003.
Orders accordingly.
Dated and signed at Nairobi this 7th day of July, 2006.
K.H. RAWAL
JUDGE
7. 7.06