[2013] KEHC 5538 (KLR)

[2013] KEHC 5538 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent transferred plot number ISUKHA/SHIRERE/4814 to herself and then to a third party after the death of the deceased and before any grant of representation had been issued. This constituted intermeddling with the estate, which is expressly prohibited by Section 45 of the Law of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] KEHC 5538 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Julius Onjiro Odera Amapesa; Applicant: Francis Otiangala Mapesa; Respondent: Emily Judith Odera
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Kakamega
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 560 of 2011
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application partly allowed
Legal Topics
Intermeddling of Estate, Revocation of Transfer, Administration of Estate, Succession Procedure
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Intermeddling of Estate Revocation of Transfer Administration of Estate Succession Procedure

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Julius Onjiro Odera Amapesa

Applicant

Francis Otiangala Mapesa

Applicant

Emily Judith Odera

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 Whether the respondent unlawfully transferred plot number ISUKHA/SHIRERE/4814 before a grant was issued.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent should be restrained from dealing with other estate properties pending grant issuance.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should render accounts relating to the deceased's estate.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent transferred plot number ISUKHA/SHIRERE/4814 to herself and then to a third party after the death of the deceased and before any grant of representation had been issued. This constituted intermeddling with the estate, which is expressly prohibited by Section 45 of the Law of Succession Act. The respondent's justification that the transfer was discussed and agreed upon by family members did not cure the illegality, as only a court-issued grant can authorize dealings with estate property. The court therefore nullified the transfer and ordered the property to revert to the deceased's name. The court declined to grant further restraining orders or require...

Court Disposition

application partly allowed

Orders

  • The transfer of plot number ISUKHA/SHIRERE/4814 is nullified and the property shall revert to the deceased.
  • The rest of the prayers in the application dated 8.10.2012 are dismissed.