[2003] KEHC 135 (KLR)
The court found that the protestor's objections were inconsistent and largely aimed at delaying the distribution of the estate. The court noted that the protestor had already received additional plots as a result of previous protests and that the encumbrance on one of the properties was officially registered. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 135 (KLR)
- Parties
- Objector: Lucy Nduta Kinyanjui; Respondent: Luka Kanyinyo; Respondent: Ruth Wanjiku Kinyanjui
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Commercial Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 600 of 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate
- Outcome
- Application for confirmation of grant allowed; distribution of estate confirmed as proposed by Administrators; each party to bear its own costs.
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Distribution of Estate, Confirmation of Grant, Inheritance Rights, Encumbrances on Property
- 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
Lucy Nduta Kinyanjui
Objector
Luka Kanyinyo
Respondent
Ruth Wanjiku Kinyanjui
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Confirmation of Grant and Distribution of Estate
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed distribution of the deceased's estate is fair and in accordance with the law.
- 2 Whether the protestor's objections regarding the value and income of the properties allocated to her are valid.
- 3 Whether marital status should affect the protestor's right to inherit.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the protestor's objections were inconsistent and largely aimed at delaying the distribution of the estate. The court noted that the protestor had already received additional plots as a result of previous protests and that the encumbrance on one of the properties was officially registered. The court affirmed that marital status should not bar a beneficiary from inheritance but found no evidence that the protestor was being unfairly treated. The court confirmed the distribution as proposed by the Administrators, holding that it was fair and in accordance with the law, and granted the application to confirm the letters of administration.
Court Disposition
Application for confirmation of grant allowed; distribution of estate confirmed as proposed by Administrators; each party to bear its own costs.
Orders
- The distribution of the estate is confirmed as proposed by the Administrators.
- The application to confirm the letters of administration is granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
26 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI
H.C. SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 600 OF 1998
LUCY NDUTA KINYANJUI …………………………….. OBJECTOR
V E R S U S
LUKA KANYINYO
RUTH WANJIKU KINYANJUI …………………… RESPONDENTS
R U L I N G
In my ruling dated 15th November, 2002 I directed the Administrators to file an application for confirmation within six weeks from the date with clarification regarding estate properties.
The properties which required clarification were L.R. No. Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/563 and L.R. No. Dagoretti/Karandini/1. The situation is now clarified by producing a certificate of confirmation of grant in the estate of Samuel Kinyanjui Luka wherein the properties including the above referred were bequeathed to the deceased herein in trust for their children except the two daughters who were married i.e. Jane Wahu and Monica Nduta. The certificate was issued on 29th September, 1995 and the present deceased who was the proprietor in trust died on 29th October, 1997 before the transfer of the properties could be effected.
The protestor Lucy Nduta Kinyanjui bitterly complains on the vast disparity in the value of the properties distributed to her and those to her three brothers. Her reasons, over and above mentioned in her earlier affidavits and submissions, are enumerated in paragraph 5 of her affidavit sworn on 14th January, 2003.
The distribution of the estate as proposed by the Administrator seems to be agreed by all the beneficiaries except the protestor.
In the initial proposal the protestor was allotted only two plots in Ruai. Thereafter all the four plots are now proposed to be given to her. Over and above that, she is given 1/3 share Dagoretti/Karandini/1 which is the share of the deceased therein. As per the official search made on 10th December, 2002, the income tax liability of Kshs.12,000,000/= is registered as an encumbrance on L.R. No. in Dagoretti/Ruthimitu/563.
The protestor’s claim that there is no such liability is thus misplaced and misleading. In her own averments made in earlier affidavit sworn on 3rd October 2002 she did aver that income of Kshs.15,000/= is derived on Karandini plot. Her averment now that the plot does not derive any income once again contradicts her own earlier averment.
In the same manner, her assertion that none of the properties proposed for her share is earning any income flies flat on her averment made in affidavit of 3rd October, 2002.
Her objection to four Ruai plots also seems to me as the churning of a daughter who is dissatisfied in all circumstances. She is given two more plots over and above the two plots which are occupied by her. (see paragraph 3 of her affidavit sworn on 3rd October, 2002).
She has also now been added one more plot at Gilgil Nyakinyua. Her objection only to its valuation being unknown is once again unfair. It definitely seems that she is only eying on the property allocated to her brother Edward. If she is complaining on an existence of a pending High Court case on Karandini plot, there is much more serious encumbrance on the Ruthimitu plot sought to be given to Edward.
The protestor is trying to delay the distribution of the estate on constant change in nature of her objection.
Obviously, she has been succeeding in her protests because after each protest she gets more. But this court feels it should come to a stop.
As she has no objections to the shares of other brothers, I think the proposed distribution to Edward Kinyanjui is fair in view of his taking over the liability for the tax due.
I do agree with the protestor that her marital status should not be a bar to her inheritance as per law.
The court should also not ignore the wishes and sentiments of the remaining family members, when the court is not satisfied that the protestor is unfairly treated.
I therefore shall confirm the distribution of the estate as proposed by the Administrators, and grant the application to confirm the letters of administration as prayed except that each party shall bear its own costs.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 28th day of March, 2003.
K. H. RAWAL
JUDGE.