https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/10900

In re Estate of Chomba (Deceased) (Probate & Administration E021 of 2020) [2026] KEHC 10900 (KLR) (17 July 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 10900 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Eldoret Probate & Administration E021 of 2020 JRA Wananda, J July 17, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE PETER KARIUKI KAMAU KIIRU CHOMBA Between Rebecca Warigia Njoroge Applicant and Leonard Gichora Kiiru Respondent Ruling 1.As recounted in the Ruling I delivered in this matter on 27/10/2023, the deceased, Peter Kamau Kariuki Kiiru Chomba, then a prominent Member of the County Assembly of Uasin Gishu, died on 10/10/2020 at the age of 58 years old. By the Petition dated 6/11/2020, the 1st and 2nd Petitioners, through Messrs Magare Musundi & Co. Advocates, describing themselves as widows of the deceased, jointly applied for a Grant of Letters of Administration to manage the estate of the deceased. The Petitioners listed themselves and their aggregate of 5 children as survivors, and also listed up to 14 parcels of land and 4 bank accounts, as the assets comprising the estate. The Grant of Letters of Administration was then issued in favour of the 1st and 2nd Petitioners as joint Administrators on 21/06/2021 but before then, the 1st Administrator had changed her Advocates to Messrs Kaka Kamau & Co. 2.Although the Summons for Confirmation of Grant dated 30/06/2022 was then filed by the 2nd Petitioner-Administrator through her Advocates, Messrs Magare Musundi & Co. with the intention of moving the Court to distribute the estate, the 2nd Petitioner-Administrator having also roped in Messrs Ngigi Mbugua & Co. as her additional Advocates, not much progress has been made in the matter since then as the two families have since then continuously tussled, basically in respect to the issue of collection of rental income from various estate properties. Although several Applications were filed in regard to that issue, and the dispute even referred to Court Annexed Mediation for purposes of exploring a possible settlement, the same did not bear fruit and the estate continues to remain in limbo for now. Further estate properties also seem to have been subsequently identified. 3.Unfortunately, matters were complicated even further when the 2nd Petitioner-Administrator, Lucy Ngendo Njoroge, herself died on 4/06/2024. Pursuant to this death, on 25/11/2024, upon being moved through a formal Application, I appointed one Rebecca Warigia Njoroge, the late 2nd Petitioner’s sister, and one Leonard Gichora Kiiru, a brother of the deceased herein, respectively, to join the 1st Petitioner/co-Administrator as additional Administrators of the estate, in place, or in substitution of the late 2nd Petitioner. 4.The “circus” however continued further when Rebecca Warigia Njoroge subsequently broke ranks with her said appointed co-Administrator, Leonard Gichora Kiiru, and appointed Messrs Chepseba Lagat & Co. as her own Advocates, through whom she then filed the Notice of Motion dated 19/07/2025 seeking removal and replacement of Leonard Gichora Kiiru, with a new co-Administrator. Specifically, the prayers sought are crafted as follows:a)[……..] spentb.That Julius Mungiri Kiiru be allowed to replace Leonard Gichora Kiiru as the legal representative in the estate of the late Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge.b.That costs be in the Cause. 5.In her Affidavit in support of the Application, the Applicant, Rebecca Warigia Njoroge, deponed that being a sister of the late 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge, a Limited Grant of Letters of Administration Ad Colligenda Bona was issued jointly to herself and the Respondent, Leonard Gichora Kiiru, a brother of the deceased herein, Peter Kamau Kariuki Kiiru Chomba, to represent the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner, but that since then, there has been “bad-blood” between the two of them and that the Respondent retained funds raised for the sole purposes of the funeral of the 2nd Petitioner, which funds have never been released to date. She claimed further that the funds were deposited into the Respondent’s daughter’s account but have not been used in the interest of the estate of the 2nd Petitioner, and also that at one point, the Respondent demanded for household goods from the house of the late 2nd Petitioner. She then asserted that the bad-blood and continuous fighting between herself and the Respondent has led to the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner being wasted away, and urged the Court to substitute the Respondent with one Julius Mungiri Kiiru, another brother of the deceased herein, Peter Kamau Kariuki Kiiru Chomba. 6.The Respondent, Leonard Gichira Kiiru, now represented by Messrs Buluma & Co. Advocates, in opposition to the Application, filed the Replying Affidavit he swore on 24/09/2025 in which he deponed that the Application is defective for being premised on the wrong provisions of the Civil Procedure Act when this is a Succession Cause, and that further, the orders sought cannot be made in this Cause. He denied the existence of any “bad-blood” between himself and the Applicant and reiterated that issues relating to the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner cannot be addressed in the instant Cause as they relate to an entirely different estate. He reiterated that the late 2nd Petitioner, being his sister-in-law, he has dealt with her affairs only to the extent approved by the family through meetings attended by the Applicant, and that even if the prayers sought were available to the Applicant, it would not be her prerogative to choose whom to work with from the family of the deceased. He also urged that if indeed the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner was going to waste, the remedy is not substitution, but the taking of accounts. 7.Also in opposition to the Application, the beneficiaries, Angel Anne Wambui Kiiru, Mwihaki Kiiru & Prince John Muchiri Kiiru, represented by Messrs H. Kago & Co. Advocates, filed the Replying Affidavit they jointly sore on 25/09/2025. They are the 3 children of the 1st Petitioner-Administrator, Alice Wambui Muchiri aka Alice Wambui Kiiru. They urged that the Application is premised on the erroneous grounds and assumption that these proceedings concern the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge, or that the parties herein have knowledge of, or any association with the family members of the late 2nd Petitioner. They also denied any knowledge of the said Julius Mungiri Kiiru, the proposed new Administrator, as he is not part or parcel of these proceedings. They further deponed that a Full Grant having since been issued in the Succession Cause concerning the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner, namely, Eldoret High Court Succession Cause No. E103 of 2024, jointly to the Applicant and one Cecilia Wangare Njoroge, the Full Grant now takes precedence and remains operative to the exclusion of the Limited Grant of Letters of Administration that had earlier been issued jointly in favour of the Applicant and the said Leonard Gichora Kiiru, and that by reason thereof, the instant Application is misconceived, bad in law and an abuse of the Court process. They urged further that in any event, the orders sought in the instant Application ought to have, instead, been sought in the said Eldoret High Court Succession Cause No. E103 of 2024. 8.There is a third Replying Affidavit on record opposing the Application. This is the one sworn by the 1st Petitioner/co-Administrator, Alice Wambui Muchiri aka Alice Wambui Kiiru, represented by Messrs Mberia & Co. Advocates. The Affidavit is basically similar to the one sworn by the 1st Petitioner’s children (beneficiaries) as already recounted above. I do not therefore deem it necessary to again recite the same matters. 9.The Applicant’s Advocates, Messrs Chepseba Lagat & Co., then, with leave of the Court, filed a Supplementary Affidavit. The same is, this time, sworn on 28/10/2025 by the proposed new Administrator, the said Julius Mungiri Kiiru, who deponed that the Respondent cannot be entrusted with the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner because of reasons she enumerated, which reasons I understood to be basically, allegations of mismanagement by the Respondent of some estate properties and funds. This was however clearly unprocedural and unacceptable as Advocates must know that being granted leave by the Court to file a Supplementary Affidavit is not permission to belatedly introduce new matters, not earlier deponed. “Sneaking in” of new matters in the guise of filing a Supplementary Affidavit, as done in this case is therefore an abuse of such leave and renders the Affidavit liable to be struck out. In response to the alleged defects raised by the Respondent, he deponed that the same and/or any technicalities can be cured under the provisions of Article 159 of the Constitution. The rest of the matters he stated are however repetitions of what was already deponed in the Supporting Affidavit. 10.I then gave the parties leave to file written Submissions. Ms. Kago, from Messrs H. Kago & Co. Advocates, and Mr. Mwangi, from Messrs Mberia & Co. Advocates, both however notified the Court that they would not be filing Submissions. I have therefore only come across two sets of Submissions, the Applicant’s dated 28/10/2025, filed through Messrs Chepseba Lagat & Co., and the Respondent’s dated 13/11/2025 filed Messrs Buluma & Co. Advocates. Applicants’ Submissions 11.In what was obviously a departure from the matters cited as being grounds of the Application, Counsel for the Applicant argued a totally different case, namely, that the the appointment of the Respondent was interim in nature, that his role was administrative and transitional to enable the Court ascertain the true accounts, and that there is no evidence of such compliance. She submitted that without such compliance, the Court cannot with certainty determine the status of the estate, and urged that Section 83 (e) and 83 (g) of the Law of Succession Act are explicit that an Administrator is under a duty to provide a full and accurate inventory and account of the administration of the estate within 6 months, or within such time as the Court may direct. As already observed, this a completely new line of submission which clearly does not tally with or arise from the grounds cited for the Application, which grounds were simply that “bad-blood” had developed between the Applicant and the Respondent because the Respondent had withheld or misused funds entrusted to him for purposes of use in the funeral of the late 2nd Petitioner, and, as such, the two could no longer work together in administering the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner. The rest of the submissions are however, basically, repetitions of the accusations made against the Respondent in the Supporting Affidavit, including the alleged refusal to release the funeral funds. He also cited authorities in support of the various limbs of his submissions. Respondents’ Submissions 12.Counsel for the Respondent’s Submissions are also basically a repetition of the arguments already made in the Respondent’s Replying Affidavit, including the argument that the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge is an estate of a different person from the estate of the deceased herein and that, by reason thereof, the two estates cannot be handled in the same Cause. He, too, cited authorities in support of the various limbs of his arguments. Determination 13.The issue that calls for determination in this matter is “whether sufficient grounds have been provided to justify removal, replacement and/or substitution of the Respondent as one of the Administrators of the estate of the deceased herein”. 14.In Kenyan succession law, an Administrator of an estate of a deceased person can be removed by the Court primarily under Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act and Rule 44 of the Probate and Administration Rules, which govern the revocation or annulment of a Grant of Representation. The Court may revoke a Grant and remove an Administrator either on its own motion (suo motu) or upon an application by an interested party (such as a beneficiary) based on the various statutory and common law grounds. 15.Grounds Provided under Section 76 are where the Administrator fails, without reasonable cause, to apply for the confirmation of the Grant within one year from the date it was issued, or where the Administrator acts negligently, delays the process unreasonably, or refuses to wind up and/or distribute the estate to the rightful beneficiaries, or where the Administrator fails to produce a true inventory or an accurate account of administration to the Court when required under Section 83, or submits records that are false, or where the Grant was obtained fraudulently by making of false statements, concealing material facts, or failing to disclose other lawful beneficiaries, or also where the Grant becomes “useless and inoperative through subsequent circumstances”, such as due to the physical or mental incapacity, or the death of a sole Administrator. 16.Other related or connected general grounds recognized by Kenyan Courts include where the Administrator misuses, loots, or sells off estate properties without Court’s authority or a confirmed Grant, thereby risking the loss of estate assets, where extreme animosity has developed between the Administrator and the beneficiaries that causes an absolute “deadlock”, thus frustrating the smooth transmission of estate properties, and also where the Administrator refuses to perform critical procedural duties required to be performed for administration of the estate. 17.In this case, the Applicant has not identified which one of the various grounds cited above she relies on. I however understand her major argument to be that the Respondent should be removed and replaced as a co-Administrator in this estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau Kkiiru Chomba because the Respondent allegedly, retained or failed to release funds collected and entrusted to him for purposes of catering for expenses for the funeral of the late 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ngendo Njoroge, which act or omission has caused or contributed to the development of “bad-blood” between the Applicant and the Respondent. She claims that as a result, the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner is going to waste. 18.Needless to state, the present Succession Cause, Eldoret High Court Succession No. E021 of 2020, relates to the estate of the late Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba, in respect to which the Applicant and the Respondent are currently two of the three Administrators, having been appointed in place of, or in substitution of the late initial co-Administrator, Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge, one of the two initial Administrators of the estate. The relationship amongst the players is that late Lucy Ngendo Njoroge, the 2nd wife (widow) of the deceased, was a sister to the Applicant. On his part, the Respondent is a brother to the deceased, thus a brother-in-law of the late Lucy Ngendo Njoroge. It is therefore clear that it is on the basis of this web of relationships that when 2nd Petitioner herself subsequently died, the separate Succession proceedings relating to her estate namely, Eldoret High Court Probate and Administration Miscellaneous Application E091 of 2024 was instituted for the purposes of applying for Limited Grant of Letters of Administration for her estate, it is the Applicant and the Respondent who were appointed to be the joint Administrators of that estate as the 2nd Petitioner had left behind young children, who were still therefore minors. 19.Clearly, the Application is misplaced as the estate of said Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba is different and separate from that of the 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ngendo Njoronge, who died later while still serving as one of the Administrators of the estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba, her husband who died earlier. The fact that the two were husband and wife has no relevance as regards the separateness of their estates. The fact that the Applicant and the Respondent were appointed the Legal Representatives of the estate of the 2nd Petitioner, when she, too, later died, was not the sole reason for their being appointed in this separate Cause to replace the 2nd Petitioner as one of the Administrators in the estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau. Whether or not therefore the Applicant and/or the Respondent remain or continue being Legal Representatives of the estate of the 2nd Petitioner has no relevance on their remaining or continuing being Administrators in this separate Cause relating to Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba. 20.In view of the above, insofar as the Application is based on the ground that the Respondent is no longer a Legal Representative or Administrator in the estate of the 2nd Petitioner, the Application is misconceived. The Applicant seems to be under the erroneous impression that the mere fact that the 2nd Petitioner had, before her own death, been appointed a co-Administrator of the estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba, means that upon her own death, issues pertaining to her estate should also be litigated in the estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba. This is not and cannot be the position. The issues raised by the Applicant are matters that ought to be raised for determination in the estate of the 2nd Petitioner, Lucy Ng’endo Njoroge, as they have nothing to do with this separate Succession Cause. The alleged “bad-blood” and infighting between the Applicant and the Respondent over the estate of the 2nd Petitioner should therefore not be extended to the separate and distinct estate of Peter Kariuki Kamau Kiiru Chomba. As correctly pointed out by the Respondents, if indeed the estate of the late 2nd Petitioner, a separate estate, is going to waste, the remedy is not in substitution of the Administrators in this separate Succession Cause, but applying for appropriate orders, perhaps for taking of accounts in that other Succession Cause or estate. 21.For the foregoing reasons, the Notice of Motion dated 19/07/2025 is hereby dismissed in its entirety. Each party shall bear his/her own costs. DELIVERED, DATED AND SIGNED AT NAIROBI ON THIS 17TH DAY OF JULY 2026……………………..WANANDA JOHN R. ANUROJUDGEDelivered in the presence of:Mr. Nafula h/b for Ms. Lagat for the Applicant/Co-AdministratorMs. Shejero h/b for Mr. Buluma for the Respondent/Co-AdministratorMr. Mwangi for Mr. Kago for the BeneficiariesCourt Assistant: Brian Kimathi