[2023] KEHC 520 (KLR)
The High Court found that the issues raised in the appeal, including the distribution of the deceased's estate and objections thereto, are more appropriately ventilated before the trial court at the stage of hearing the pending applications for confirmation of grant and distribution. The appellate court determined...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KEHC 520 (KLR)
- Parties
- Appellant: Joseph Muthomi M’Arachi; Respondent: Ruth Nkou M’Arachi
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Civil Appeal 121 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Judges
- TW Cherere
- Legal Topics
- Succession Proceedings, Grant Revocation, Estate Distribution, Confirmation of Grant
- 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
Joseph Muthomi M’Arachi
Appellant
Ruth Nkou M’Arachi
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial magistrate erred in revoking and reissuing the grant to both parties.
- 2 Whether the issues raised in the appeal should be determined at the appellate stage or before the trial court during distribution of the estate.
- 3 Whether the appeal has merit in light of pending applications for confirmation of grant and distribution.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court found that the issues raised in the appeal, including the distribution of the deceased's estate and objections thereto, are more appropriately ventilated before the trial court at the stage of hearing the pending applications for confirmation of grant and distribution. The appellate court determined that there was no merit in the appeal as the trial magistrate had properly exercised discretion by revoking and reissuing the grant to both parties and directing them to apply for confirmation. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the parties were directed to pursue their claims and objections before the trial court during the confirmation proceedings.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
- Parties to proceed before the trial court for hearing of pending applications for confirmation of grant and distribution of the estate.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
23 paragraphs
M’Arachi v M’Arachi (Civil Appeal 121 of 2021) [2023] KEHC 520 (KLR) (3 February 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KEHC 520 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the High Court at Meru
Civil Appeal 121 of 2021
TW Cherere, J
February 3, 2023
Between
Joseph Muthomi M’Arachi
Appellant
and
Ruth Nkou M’Arachi
Respondent
(Being an appeal from the ruling in Meru Succession Cause No. 89 OF 2016 by Hon. E. Shimonjero (RM) on 28th July, 2021)
Judgment
Background 1)By an application dated January 21, 2020, appellant and another sought orders as against the respondent as follows;1)Revocation of the grant issued to appellant and respondent on August 29, 20172)Accounts from properties situated in LR. Ntima/Igoki/5673from December, 2016 to date3)Rental income from LR. Ntima/Igoki/5673 be deposited in court until the cause is concluded4)A determination that deceased died testate5)Costs
3. Respondent having sought specific relief, it was expected of the trial magistrate to specifically state which of the relief had been proved and how much had been awarded under each heading.
3. By a ruling dated July 28, 2021, the trial magistrate stated that the grant issued to appellant and the respondent stood revoked as at January 3, 2020. The court noting that the estate could not be left unadministered re-issued the grant to appellant and respondent and directed that they apply for confirmation within 45 days.
3. On August 27, 2021, appellant lodged this appeal. The pendency of the appeal notwithstanding, and in compliance with the court’s order dated July 28, 2021, appellant on September 13, 2021 filed an application for confirmation of grant and made his proposal for the distribution of the estate.
3. Consequently, on 27th September, respondent also filed an application for confirmation of grant and made his proposal for the distribution of the estate.
3. I have considered the appeal in the light of the submission filed by both parties. There is no dispute that deceased’s estate is yet to be distributed. I have no difficulty in agreeing with the respondent that the issues raised in this appeal are better ventilated before the trial court at the point of hearing the pending applications for distribution of the estate and objections if any.
3. Consequently, I find that this appeal is not merited and it is dismissed
DATED AT MERU THIS 03 RDDAY OF FEBRUARY 2022WAMAE. W. CHEREREJUDGEAppearancesCourt Assistant - Morris KinotiFor Appellant - Mr. Kaimenyi for Kaimenyi Kithinji & Co. AdvocatesFor Respondent - Mr. Ondari for Leonard Ondari & Co. Advocates