[2014] KEHC 5483 (KLR)
The court found that the administrator, as holder of the confirmed grant, is legally mandated to administer and distribute the estate in accordance with the certificate of confirmation of grant. The respondents did not oppose the application, and their interference with the subdivision process would frustrate the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2014] KEHC 5483 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: John Koirugo Njoroge; Respondent: Hannah Wangui Njoroge
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 1823 of 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Restrain Interference With Subdivision of Estate Property
- Outcome
- Application allowed.
- Judges
- DN Musyoka
- Legal Topics
- Administration of Estates, Confirmation of Grant, Distribution of Estate Assets, Subdivision of Land
- 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
John Koirugo Njoroge
Applicant
Hannah Wangui Njoroge
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application to Restrain Interference With Subdivision of Estate Property
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the administrator should be restrained from interference by the respondent and others in the subdivision of the estate property as per the confirmed grant.
- 2 Whether the administrator is entitled to carry out the subdivision and vesting of the estate property in accordance with the certificate of confirmation of grant.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the administrator, as holder of the confirmed grant, is legally mandated to administer and distribute the estate in accordance with the certificate of confirmation of grant. The respondents did not oppose the application, and their interference with the subdivision process would frustrate the administrator's statutory duties. Therefore, the court allowed the application to restrain the respondents from interfering with the subdivision and vesting of Dagoretti/Riruta/230, enabling the administrator to complete the distribution of the estate as required by law.
Court Disposition
Application allowed.
Orders
- The application dated 4th June 2012 is allowed.
- Respondents are restrained from interfering with the subdivision of Dagoretti/Riruta/230 as per the certificate of confirmation of grant dated 26th January 2011.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
20 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 1823 OF 2009
AND
IN THE MATTER OF WANJIRU NJOROGE
(DECEASED)
RULING
1. The grant herein was made on 7th December 2009 to John Koirugo Njoroge as administrator of the estate of his mother Wanjiru Njoroge.
2. The said Wanjiru Njoroge had died on 20th September 1997. She had two sons – Daniel Njenga Njoroge and John Koirugo Njoroge. By the time representation to her estate was being sought in 2009, Daniel Njenga Njoroge had died and was survived by a widow, Hannah Wambui Njenga.
3. The grant was confirmed on 26th January 2011. The estate comprised of one asset –Dagoretti/Riruta/230- measuring 2. 21 acres or thereabout. It was available for distribution among the two survivors of the deceased and it was shared out equally between them, with each taking 1. 105 acres. A certificate of confirmation of grant to that effect was issued dated 26th January 2011.
4. The administrator of the estate John Koirugo Njoroge, has come back to court by an application dated 4th June 2012 seeking orders to restrain his co-survivor – Hannah Wangui Njoroge – and others from interfering with the process of subdivision of the land in giving effect to the grant as per the certificate of confirmation of grant dated 26th January 2011. He complains that the 1st respondent and her children are interfering with the subdivision of the land.
5. There is no record to show that the application was served on the respondents. There is no affidavit of service on record. I note however that on 26th June 2012 Messrs Matwere & Co, Advocates filed a notice of appointment of advocates dated 22nd June 2012 purporting to have instructions from the respondents. The respondents did not reply to the application as there are no replying affidavits on record. The record however would indicate that the respondents were aware of the application as their counsel, Mr. Matwere or his representative, attended court on the dates that the matter came up on 24th April 2013, 3rd July 2013, 31st July 2013 and 31st July 2013.
6. I note that the applicant is the administrator of the estate by virtue of his being the holder of the grant of letters of administration dated 7th December 2009. It is his duty as such to administer the estate. As the grant has been confirmed, it is his duty to carry into effect the contents of the certificate of confirmation of grant dated 26th January 2011. Administration of the estate is complete once the assets are distributed. In this case distribution will be complete once Dagoretti/Riruta/230 is subdivided and the subsequent subdivisions vested in the two survivors. It is the administrator’s duty to cause the subdivision and vesting of the property. He argues that the exercise is being frustrated by the respondents.
7. As the application is not opposed, I find no basis for disallowing it. Disallowing the same would be tantamount to exposing the administrator to frustration in the discharge of his responsibilities as such.
8. The application dated 4th June 2012 is hereby allowed. There shall be no order for costs.
DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 25th DAY OF April, 2014.
W. MUSYOKA
JUDGE
In the presence of Mr. Gatumuta for Mr. Munyoki advocate for the applicants.
No apperance for the respondents.