[2011] KEHC 759 (KLR)
The court found that the petitioner had made false statements in his petition by claiming to be the only surviving child and by omitting other beneficiaries. The court was bound by its earlier finding that all sons of the deceased, including the petitioner, had not received any benefit from the deceased during his...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2011] KEHC 759 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: M’Itunga M’Ikiunga; Respondent: M’Rimberia M’Ikiunga; Respondent: Francis M’Itunga M’Ikiunga; Respondent: Gerevasio Mbogori M’Ikiunga; Respondent: M’Ethira M’Ikiunga; Respondent: M’Mukira M’Ikiunga
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Meru
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Succession Cause 195 of 2003
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Estate distributed equally among five beneficiaries; rectification of land registration; costs to objectors.
- Judges
- JW Lessit
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Distribution of Estate, Rectification of Grant, Beneficiary Entitlement
- 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
M’Itunga M’Ikiunga
Applicant
M’Rimberia M’Ikiunga
Respondent
Francis M’Itunga M’Ikiunga
Respondent
Gerevasio Mbogori M’Ikiunga
Respondent
M’Ethira M’Ikiunga
Respondent
M’Mukira M’Ikiunga
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the petitioner was entitled to the entire estate of the deceased to the exclusion of other beneficiaries.
- 2 Whether the estate property should be distributed equally among all beneficiaries.
- 3 Whether the registration of parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 should be rectified to reflect the correct ownership.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the petitioner had made false statements in his petition by claiming to be the only surviving child and by omitting other beneficiaries. The court was bound by its earlier finding that all sons of the deceased, including the petitioner, had not received any benefit from the deceased during his lifetime. The argument that the petitioner should inherit the entire estate was rejected. The court held that the only property of the estate, parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330, should be distributed equally among the five named beneficiaries, taking into account the areas each had developed. The registration of the parcel in the petitioner's name was ordered to be rectified to...
Court Disposition
Estate distributed equally among five beneficiaries; rectification of land registration; costs to objectors.
Orders
- Rectification of registration of parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 by cancelling the name of M’Itunga M’Kiunga and registering it in the name of Ikiunga Raria (deceased).
- Restriction on parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 is lifted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
30 paragraphs
SUCCESSION
·Distribution.
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYAAT MERU
HIGH COURT SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 195 OF 2003
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE IKUNGA RARIA (DECEASED)
M’ITUNGA M’IKIUNGA.................................................................................PETITIONER
VERSUS
M’RIMBERIA M’IKIUNGA................................................................................OBJECTOR
JUDGMENT
The grant issued to the petitioner M’Itunga M’Ikiunga was revoked by this court’s ruling of 19th December 2008. In revoking that grant, the court found that the petitioner had made false statement in his petition. He had described himself as the only surviving child of the deceased. He stated in his petition that his other two sisters were deceased. The court by its ruling of 19th December 2008 found that the deceased was survived by 8 children. The only property of this estate is parcel No.Kiirua/Ruiri/Kithiru. The court in hearing the application for a revocation of the grant received viva voce evidence. The evidence adduced before the court during that hearing was that all the deceased sons who included the petitioner had other parcels of land the court by its aforestated ruling stated as follows:-
“What clearly emerges is that the sons of M’Ikiunga M’Raria were in 1965 and after, beneficiaries of government settlement in large tracks of land. Raria himself was the beneficiary of Kiirua/Ruiri/300 which the petitioner seeks to appropriate to himself in this cause.”
Thatfindingofthe court has not been challenged in an appeal. I am therefore bound by that finding. The court on revoking the grant issued to the petitioner ordered that a fresh grant be issued in the joint names of M’Itunga and M’Rimbere. Thereafter, the court invited the beneficiaries to file written submissions on the mode of distribution of this estate. It is the distribution of this estate which now falls on my hands to decide upon. The written submissions were filed by the petitioner where he submitted that the deceased had in his lifetime given the other beneficiaries his brothers land in his lifetime. He therefore sought that parcel No. 330 be wholly given to him. That argument was rejected by this court in its ruling dated 19th December 2008 as quoted above. The other beneficiaries state that the sons of the deceased have built houses on parcel No. 330 and therefore sought it be distributed equally between them and such distribution do take into account of where each has constructed their houses. That mode of distribution that is, dividing the parcel equally amongst the beneficiaries is the one that this court will adopt. The court will adopt it because it is bound by the finding of this court by its ruling of 19th December 2008 which found that none of the beneficiaries obtained any benefit from the deceased in his lifetime. It is for that reason that I give the following orders in this judgment:-
1. An order of rectification is hereby issued rectifying the registration of parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 by canceling the name of M’Itunga M’Kiunga and by registering the said plot in the name of Ikiunga Raria deceased.
2. The restriction placed on parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 is hereby lifted.
3. The grant issued in the joint names of M’Itunga M’Ikiunga and Rimbere M’Ikiunga is hereby confirmed to the effect that parcel No. Kiirua/Ruiri/330 be shared equally between the following beneficiaries:-
i) Francis M’Itunga M’Ikiunga
ii) M’Rimbere M’Ikiunga
iii) Gerevasio Mbogori M’Ikiunga
iv) M’Ethira M’Ikiunga
v) M’Mukira M’Ikiunga
4. Such sharing of that parcel of land amongst the beneficiaries as stated above shall take into account where each beneficiary has occupied and developed.
5. There shall be costs for the objectors to be paid by M’Itunga M’Ikiunga.
6. This judgment shall be transmitted to the High Court at Nairobi Family Division to be placed in the file High Court Succession Cause No. 57 of 2005 which succession also related to the deceased herein and to his property Kiirua/Ruiri/330.
Judgment by:-
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE
Dated, signed and delivered at Meru this 29th day of September 2011 by:-
J. LESIIT
JUDGE