[2025] KEHC 9848 (KLR)
The court determined that the oral application to amend the summons to correct the description of the estate and parties was not appropriate in the circumstances, given the prior direction that such amendments should be made formally. The court emphasized the importance of procedural regularity, particularly where...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KEHC 9848 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Naomi Wamaitha Kamau; Appellant: Naomi Wamaitha Maina; Appellant: John Stephen Kibe Kiongo; Appellant: Monica Wanjiku Kiongo; Appellant: Simon Nganga Kiongo; Appellant: Margaret Nyambura Kiongo; Respondent: Joseph Stephen Mwangi Kibe; Respondent: Rahab Wanjiru Kiongo; Intended Respondent: David Mukora Chege & Simon Mbuthia Chege (For the Estate of Evan Kiongo Thamani); Intended Respondent: Evans Chege Kiongo
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kiambu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal E001 of 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Directions on Interlocutory Applications
- Outcome
- Directions issued; no substantive determination on merits.
- Judges
- DO Chepkwony
- Legal Topics
- Joinder of Parties, Amendment of Pleadings, Stay of Execution, Estate Administration
- 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
Naomi Wamaitha Kamau
Appellant
Naomi Wamaitha Maina
Appellant
John Stephen Kibe Kiongo
Appellant
Monica Wanjiku Kiongo
Appellant
Simon Nganga Kiongo
Appellant
Margaret Nyambura Kiongo
Appellant
Joseph Stephen Mwangi Kibe
Respondent
Rahab Wanjiru Kiongo
Respondent
David Mukora Chege & Simon Mbuthia Chege (For the Estate of Evan Kiongo Thamani)
Intended Respondent
Evans Chege Kiongo
Intended Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Directions on Interlocutory Applications
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 3rd and 4th intended respondents should be enjoined as parties to the appeal.
- 2 Whether oral amendment of the summons to correct party names is permissible or requires a formal application.
- 3 Whether a stay of execution should be granted pending the outcome of related proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The court determined that the oral application to amend the summons to correct the description of the estate and parties was not appropriate in the circumstances, given the prior direction that such amendments should be made formally. The court emphasized the importance of procedural regularity, particularly where party identity and estate administration are in issue. Accordingly, the intended respondents were directed to file a formal application for amendment within fourteen days. Similarly, the appellants were directed to file a formal application for stay of execution. The court granted all parties leave to respond to any applications filed, ensuring procedural fairness and the...
Court Disposition
Directions issued; no substantive determination on merits.
Orders
- The 3rd and 4th intended respondents are directed to file a formal application for amendment of pleadings within fourteen (14) days.
- The appellants are directed to file a formal application for stay of execution within fourteen (14) days.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
Kamau & 5 others v Kibe & 3 others (Civil Appeal E001 of 2025) [2025] KEHC 9848 (KLR) (13 June 2025) (Directions)
Neutral citation: [2025] KEHC 9848 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Kiambu
Civil Appeal E001 of 2025
DO Chepkwony, J
June 13, 2025
Between
Naomi Wamaitha Kamau
1st Appellant
Naomi Wamaitha Maina
2nd Appellant
John Stephen Kibe Kiongo
3rd Appellant
Monica Wanjiku Kiongo
4th Appellant
Simon Nganga Kiongo
5th Appellant
Margaret Nyambura Kiongo
6th Appellant
and
Joseph Stephen Mwangi Kibe
1st Respondent
Rahab Wanjiru Kiongo
2nd Respondent
and
David Mukora Chege & Simon Mbuthia Chege (For the Estate of Evan Kiongo Thamani)
1st Intended Respondent
Evans Chege Kiongo
2nd Intended Respondent
Directions
1. Evan Kiongo Thamani and Evan Chege Kiongo filed a Summons dated 7th March, 2025 seeking to be enjoined in this suit as 3rd and 4th Respondents. When the matter came up for mention for parties to take directions on the Summons application on 10th June, 2025, their counsel, Mr Kimori informed the court that he intended to orally amend the said Summons to read Estate of the late Evan Chege Muithiri instead of the late Kiongo Thamani and for Paragraph 2 to be amended to read the Estate of the Evan Chege Muithiri instead of the Estate of the late Kiongo Kamau.
2. The 3rd Applicant objected to the oral application for amendment and urged that they ought to file a formal application on the same as directed by the court on 22nd February, 2025. He went on to explain that the case is in respect of one family where the 1st Respondent has been sued as a paternal grandson of one Kiongo Thamani and the 2nd Respondent as the only surviving wife of Kiongo wa Thamani. He stated that they have sued the Administrators of the Estate of Kiongo wa Thamani and not any other party. He stated that there is another case which is running concurrently with this case at the Engineer Court. He urged this court to grant stay of execution since the case at Engineer Court is coming up for mention on 5th July, 2025.
3. The 1st Respondent confirmed having filed amended Replying Affidavit dated 5th March, 2025 in response to the main application and that the Applicants have also filed amended submissions. He invited the court to peruse the record and will establish that the case has been before court since 1996 and thus seeks that the case be put to rest since the beneficiaries got their respective shares and that there is no mistake made.
4. The 3rd and 4th Respondents in rejoinder indicated that the amendments referred to were mere typos which the court should allow orally. They have urged that they be enjoined in the proceedings since they are parties in the matter before the subordinate court and it is in the interest of justice that they be made parties to the appeal.
5. In light of the above arguments made by the parties and considered by the court, the following orders issue:-a.The 3rd and 4th Respondents be and are hereby directed to file formal application for amendment of pleadings for the consideration of the court within fourteen (14) days from the date of this ruling.b.The Appellants are also directed to make a formal application of stay of execution within fourteen (14) days of this ruling.c.The parties are all granted leave to file respective responses to the said applications if and when filed, all within 14 days.d.The matter to be mentioned for purposes of confirming compliance with the directions.
It is so ordered.
RULING DELIVERED VIRTUALLY, DATED AND SIGNED AT KIAMBU THIS 13TH DAY OFJUNE 2025. D. O. CHEPKWONYJUDGE