[2008] KEHC 2746 (KLR)
The court found that the applicant, as a brother of the deceased, was not a survivor entitled to inherit under the Law of Succession Act where the deceased was survived by a spouse and children. The omission of the applicant's name from the list of survivors was not fraudulent or untrue, as he was not entitled to a...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 2746 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Mbugi Murathi; Respondent: Regina Kariuko Njogu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Embu
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 22 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Summons for Revocation of Grant / Judgment
- Outcome
- application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Revocation of Grant, Probate and Administration, Kindred Rights, Distribution of Estate
- 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
Mbugi Murathi
Applicant
Regina Kariuko Njogu
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Summons for Revocation of Grant / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant of letters of administration was obtained fraudulently by false statement or concealment of material facts.
- 2 Whether omission of the applicant as a brother of the deceased from the list of survivors justified revocation of the grant.
- 3 Whether the estate was distributed in accordance with the law and if the applicant was entitled to a share.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the applicant, as a brother of the deceased, was not a survivor entitled to inherit under the Law of Succession Act where the deceased was survived by a spouse and children. The omission of the applicant's name from the list of survivors was not fraudulent or untrue, as he was not entitled to a share in the presence of closer relatives. The court also found that the prescribed notice was duly published and that the estate had been distributed in accordance with the law. There was no evidence of fraud, concealment, or trust in favour of the applicant. Consequently, the grounds for revocation of the grant were not established.
Court Disposition
application dismissed
Orders
- The application for revocation of grant is dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondent.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF NJOGU MURATHI-DECEASED
AND
MBUGI MURATHI……………………………………………APPLICANT
VERSUS
REGINA KARIUKO NJOGU……………………………RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
Summons for Revocation of grant dated 23/4/2003 was filed by MBUGI MURATHI based on the two grounds:-
1. That the grant was obtained fraudulently by making false statement and concealment to the of something material to the cause
2. That the grant was obtained by means of untrue allegation of a fact essential in point of law to justify the grant notwithstanding that the allegation was made in ignorance or inadvertently.
The supporting affidavit shows that the applicant was a brother of the deceased. The grant for administration for the estate of the deceased was granted to Respondent and was thereafter confirmed. The applicant swears that as a brother of deceased he is entitled to share in his estate. The deceased was married to one wife, the Respondent and the deceased was survived by his wife and children and the applicant. The land left behind by deceased is Kabare/Njiku/5. Applicant filed a caution against the title on 19/1/1998. There is another piece of land Kabare/Nyangati/34/67. The details of survivors are stated in P& A Form filed on 15th January 2001. It is true that the Applicant is not included as one of the survivors. However he was a brother as he says and under Section 39 of the Succession Act the priority father, mother, brothers and sisters are referred to as kindred of the deceased. The applicant is not a survivor of deceased but a kindred. Therefore it is not false or untrue to omit his name since there were survivors to inherit assets of the deceased.
On the issue of notice of filing succession case the prescribed Gazette Notice was published to all the world and therefore it cannot be said that the matter was undertaken in secret.
It is confirmed by applicant that the land has been distributed among the widow and her children. That is what the law requires. Regarding the occupation of the land the respondent has denied this allegation and has disclosed that applicant has plot No. 56 Kimunye Market and some 5 acres in Laikipia District.
The deceased land Kabari/Njiku/5 was registered in his name in July 1958 and no trust is registered against the title. Therefore this court does not find any evidence of the trust in favour or the applicant or any other person.
Upon considering all the issues raised by parties this court does not find any proof of the grounds alleged in the Summons to warrant the revocation of the grant issued and confirmed herein.
The application is dismissed with costs to the Respondent.
Dated this 24th January, 2008.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE
24/1/2008
Khaminwa – Judge
Njue – Clerk
Applicant and Respondent present
Judgment read in open court.
J. N. KHAMINWA
JUDGE