[2009] KEHC 36 (KLR)
The court found that the temporary letters of grant intestate issued to the petitioner had not been confirmed for over seven years, contrary to the requirements of section 76 d(i) of the Law of Succession Act. Despite notice to show cause, no party appeared to oppose revocation, and the petitioner’s advocate...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2009] KEHC 36 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: David Ngeno; Deceased: Milka Kipngeno Turgut
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kericho
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Probate & Administration 50 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Probate and Administration / Ruling on Revocation of Grant
- Outcome
- grant revoked for non-compliance with section 76 d(i) of the Law of Succession Act
- Legal Topics
- Succession Procedure, Revocation of Grant, Confirmation of Grant, Failure to Confirm, 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
David Ngeno
Petitioner
Milka Kipngeno Turgut
Deceased
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Ruling on Revocation of Grant
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the grant of letters of administration should be revoked for failure to confirm the grant within twelve months as required by law.
- 2 Whether the court can revoke the grant suo moto under section 76 d(i) of the Law of Succession Act.
- 3 Whether the petitioner or any other party has shown cause why the grant should not be revoked.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the temporary letters of grant intestate issued to the petitioner had not been confirmed for over seven years, contrary to the requirements of section 76 d(i) of the Law of Succession Act. Despite notice to show cause, no party appeared to oppose revocation, and the petitioner’s advocate conceded that the grant should be revoked. The court held that the failure to confirm the grant within twelve months, as mandated by law, justified revocation of the grant suo moto. The court further noted that the relationship of the survivors to the deceased was not disclosed and that the advocate implied lack of interest in proceeding due to encumbrances on the estate property....
Court Disposition
grant revoked for non-compliance with section 76 d(i) of the Law of Succession Act
Orders
- The grant of letters of administration issued on 25th June 2002 is revoked.
- The temporary letters of grant to be returned to court.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
39 paragraphs
1. Family Law
2. Law of Succession Act Cap 160 Laws of Kenya
3. Subject of main case.
(i) Revocation.
(ii) Suo moto section 76 d (i) revocation of grant for failure to confirm grant after
twelve months.
(iii) Deceased male adult aged 68 years old in 28th April 1996.
(iv) Temporary letters of grant issued Visram J 25th June, 2002.
(v) P & A 30 – 30th May 2001 Kenya Gazette 18th April, 2001.
(vi) Survivors relationship unknown
(vii) Advocate unable to trace or get clients. Conceeds grant be revoked
4. Held
i) Grant revoked for non compliance of section 76 d(i).
5. Case law - Nil
6. Advocate
J.M. Motanya advocate instructed by M/S Motanya & Co. Advocates for the petitioner.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT
AT KERICHO
Probate & Administration 50 of 2001
MILKA KIPNGENO TURGUT…………………. DECEASED
AND
DAVID NGENO …………………………………PETITIONER
RULING
Revocation of grant
Suo Moto
Section 76 d (i)
I.Procedure
1. Temporary letters of grant intestate were issued to the petitioner on the 25th January 2002 (Visram J) for seven years no one has come to court to apply to confirm the said grant. This court issued notice under section 76 d (i) of the Law of Succession Cause to show cause under form P & A 69 why the grant ought not to be revoked having not been confirmed at least within the twelve (12) months period.
2. The estate of the deceased, Mika King’eno Turgat aged sixty eight (68) years old male adult a farmer who died suddenly on 28th April, 1996, was taken out by the Petitioner who claimed to be his son. He applied for the grant through his advocate J.M. Motanya & Co. advocates. His attempt to obtain his client proved fruitless. After a few adjournments, he informed the court that the property/asset had a lot of mortgage. He then prayed that the grant be revoked.
II: Opinion
3. All the applicants require to do is to confirm the grant. In the P&A 5 no liability had been disclosed despite the title showing in its green card the varies change to a bank. The applicants needed to pay off the said change to access the property. Their advocate implies that due to this, they are not interested. Those named on the form P&A 5 have not disclosed their relationship to the deceased.
4. I hereby revoke this grant. The temporary letters of grant issued on 25th June, 2002, seven years ago be returned to court. The Principal Registry to be served with a copy of this ruling to note for their records.
5. The creditors if any may petition the Public Trustee to take over the estate.
DATEDthis 30th day of November, 2009 at KERICHO
M.A. ANG’AWA
JUDGE
Advocate
J.M. Motanya advocate instructed by M/S Motanya & Co. Advocates for the petitioner.