https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9224

In re Estate of Kungu (Deceased) (Succession Cause 2713 of 2002) [2026] KEHC 9224 (KLR) (Family) (25 June 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 9224 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts) Family Succession Cause 2713 of 2002 HK Chemitei, J June 25, 2026 Between Peter Ndua Kung’U Applicant and Myra Wanjiku Kung’U Sadiq 1st Respondent James Ng’Ang’A Kung’U 2nd Respondent Marryanne Wanjiku Kung 3rd Respondent Ruling 1.The application dated 7th March 2025 by the Applicant seeks the following prayers:(a)That the confirmed grant of letters of administration made on the 15th day of February 2021 (hereinafter referred to as the said grant to Myra Wanjiku Kungu Sadiq, James Nganga Kungu, Maryanne Wanjiku Kungu be revoked.(b)That all consequential orders premised on the said confirmed grant be set aside for being inoperative.(c)Any other expedient orders. 2.The application is based on the grounds thereof and the sworn affidavit of the Applicant dated 15th July 2025. 3.The substance of the application is that the Applicant is a beneficiary of the estate herein. The Respondents are equally beneficiaries as well as Administrators of the estate. 4.The grant herein which was first issued to the Applicant’s mother who was the deceased wife was issued on 17th March 2003 and confirmed on 4th July 2006 and later rectified on 5th February 2007. 5.The same grant was amended on 27th June 2018 and 15th February 2021 respectively. 6.It is the Applicant’s case that the Respondents have failed to execute the grant and for the last four years have done nothing despite his persistence hence this application. 7.The Respondents through the replying affidavit of James Nganga Kung’u sworn on 10th March 2026 have opposed the application arguing that they have largely executed the grant and that the remaining properties were due to reasons beyond their control. 8.That the Applicant has also been an impediment since he failed to provide his ArthiSasa account details. 9.He also deponed that part of the estate is intertwined with the estate of their late mother Edith Nungari Kung’u which is being handled under case Number 1455 of 2017 in this Court. 10.The Applicant vide his further affidavit sworn on 4th May 2026 has refuted the replying affidavit and added that contrary to the averments he had provided all that the Administrators needed. 11.He deponed that the only property which had been dealt with was Nyeri Municipality Block III 142 and nothing more. 12.That as a matter of fact the Court had given them 90 days from 22nd October 2025 to complete the exercise but to date, they have failed to fully administer the estate. Analysis And Determination 13.The reasons to revoke or not a grant is fully explained under Section 76 of the Succession Act. One of the grounds include failure by the Administrators to administer the estate fully despite being granted the grant. 14.They as a matter of fact supposed within six months to complete the exercise barring any encumbrance and notify the Court for purposes of putting closure to the estate. 15.This Court is well seized of this matter and as rightfully deponed by the Applicant on 22nd October 2025 it gave the Administrators 90 days to complete the exercise. There is no evidence that they ever complied. 16.I note that the grant has been rectified severally and despite this there is no meaningful effort by the Respondents to conclude the estate. 17.Granted, there could have been reasons beyond their control, for example where the property is intertwined with that of their late mother or is challenged through a Court process. 18.I however do not think that all the properties are encumbered. Those which are free must be devolved to the relevant beneficiaries as per the confirmed grant. It is not the business of the Administrators to hold onto the properties which in law must devolve to the deceased beneficiaries. 19.In my view, the Respondents have specialized in rectification of the grant. Even if new assets are discovered the same must be dealt with as they are found. It cannot be the reason to hold the rest of the unencumbered estate. 20.The Respondents failed to honor the orders of 25th October 2025 and to date they have not demonstrated any meaningful effort. 21.The Court shall grant them an opportunity to carry out and complete the exercise. This estate has been in these corridors for the last 24 years which in my view is unacceptable noting that there is no serious objection by any third party. 22.I have seen correspondences attached to the Applicant’s supporting affidavit. The series of emails is a testimony that not all is well between them. The more reason therefore that each of them be given their bequeath so as to move on as per the grant. 23.In the premises I direct that:(a)The Respondents are hereby granted 90 days to complete the execution of the grant dated 15th February 2021 and in default the same stands revoked and any of the beneficiaries be at liberty to apply.(b)Costs in the cause. DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA VIDEO LINK AT NAIROBI THIS 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2026.H. K. CHEMITEIJUDGE, FCIArb.