[2015] KEHC 5628 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 5628 (KLR)

The court found that the respondent's refusal to cooperate in the distribution of the estate was unjustified and based on mere excuses. The respondent had not made a formal application for rectification of the grant as required by law. The confirmed grant, issued on 10/2/2009, remained valid and executable. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] KEHC 5628 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Margaret Rwamba Njagi; Respondent: Taracisio Ndwiga Njagi
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Embu
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
Succession Cause 284 of 2004
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Execution of Grant
Outcome
Application allowed.
Legal Topics
Administration of Estates, Confirmation of Grant, Rectification of Grant, Distribution of Estate
Source Language
en
Family and Children Civil Procedure Administration of Estates Confirmation of Grant Rectification of Grant Distribution of Estate

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret Rwamba Njagi

Applicant

Taracisio Ndwiga Njagi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Succession Cause / Ruling on Application for Execution of Grant

  1. 1 Whether the Deputy Registrar and the applicant should be authorized to execute documents necessary for distribution of the estate pursuant to the confirmed grant.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent's refusal to cooperate justifies the intervention of the court to facilitate distribution of the estate.
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's request for rectification of the grant is valid in the absence of a formal application.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent's refusal to cooperate in the distribution of the estate was unjustified and based on mere excuses. The respondent had not made a formal application for rectification of the grant as required by law. The confirmed grant, issued on 10/2/2009, remained valid and executable. The prolonged delay of six years since confirmation was prejudicial to the applicant and other beneficiaries, who were being denied their rightful shares while the respondent continued to enjoy exclusive use of the estate property. The court held that the interests of justice required the estate to be distributed without further delay, and authorized the Deputy Registrar to execute all...

Court Disposition

Application allowed.

Orders

  • The Deputy Registrar High Court is authorized to execute the relevant documents on behalf of the administrators in this cause for the purpose of executing the grant dated 10th February 2009.
  • There will be no orders as to costs.