https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/6513

In re Estate of JKM (Deceased) (Succession Cause E1062 of 2023) [2026] KEHC 6513 (KLR) (Family) (6 May 2026) (Ruling) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 6513 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts) Family Succession Cause E1062 of 2023 CJ Kendagor, J May 6, 2026 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JKM – DECEASED Between TM (Suing through his next friend TNM) Applicant and MMN Respondent Ruling 1.JKM died on 16th March, 2023. MMN was appointed administrator, and the Grant of Letters of Administration intestate was confirmed on 19th June, 2024. 2.The Court, on its own motion, halted the processing of the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant to allow the Administrator to clarify issues regarding some of the properties listed in the schedule of distribution. While this was pending, TNM, the mother and next friend of TM, a minor (Applicant) filed Summons for revocation of the grant issued to M (Respondent). 3.The matter proceeded through viva voce hearing on the summons for revocation. During this hearing, the Applicant filed an application dated 24th July, 2025 wherein she requested the Court to issue an order for DNA testing to determine the paternity of the minor involved. 4.The Respondent/Administrator opposes the application, arguing that the Applicant is misleading the Court and seeks to unfairly benefit from the estate, which they have no right to do. 5.The issues outlined in the summons for revocation pertain to the disclosure of assets belonging to the estate and the determination of whether the minor qualifies as a dependant of the deceased. 6.The Court exercises caution in refraining from determining the issues pertinent to the revocation summons. However, it is essential to apply a test grounded in the evidence already submitted to ascertain whether the orders for DNA testing are in the interest of justice. 7.In the case of Re Estate of SKC (Deceased [2019] eKLR, the court allowed DNA testing and stated as follows;“The issue in dispute is that of paternity and this can only be determined in the circumstances of this case, if the court takes the approach of the best available way to establish the truth and do justice, over the right to privacy and bodily integrity which ought be respected. This therefore demands that the court employs the best known and most accurate method to arrive at a just decision. The beneficiaries named in the application may suffer some inconvenience and intrusion to their privacy, which has to be weighed against the need for a lasting justice in the matter. Quite obviously the issue of inheritance is at stake. If the results favor the applicant, they stand to benefit, if not, status quo of the estate shall be maintained and these proceedings will automatically end.” 8.Because DNA testing orders carry significant implications, Courts refrain from issuing them without sufficient justification from the party seeking the DNA testing. A party must establish a compelling link showing that the proposed DNA testing is warranted and that a just determination cannot be reached without the test being carried out and results presented to the Court. 9.In this case, the evidence has been taken on the summons for revocation of the grant. Part of the evidence is that the minor is 11 years old, born on 9th November, 2014. The Applicant contends that the deceased acknowledged the child as his and would send funds primarily intended for the child’s maintenance and welfare. The evidence presented consists of Mpesa statements documenting consistent monetary transfers from the Deceased to the Applicant over the period from 2014 to 2023. 10.From the testimony and documentation, I find sufficient prima facie evidence to support the conclusion that the Applicant has established a reasonable basis for requesting DNA testing. 11.As the pleadings show that the Estate has other beneficiaries beyond the Administrator/Respondent, who was the sole participant in both the application and the oral testimony, the Court deems it necessary that the remaining beneficiaries of the Estate of JKM, identified as the Deceased’s children, be present before any further directions are issued regarding the DNA testing. Consequently, the Court orders that all beneficiaries are to appear before it on a date to be fixed upon the delivery of this ruling for the purpose of taking further directions concerning the orders allowing DNA testing. 12.Each party shall bear its own costs of the application dated 24th July, 2025. 13.Orders accordingly. DATED AND DELIVERED AT NAIROBI THIS 06TH DAY OF MAY, 2026.……………………HON C. KENDAGORJUDGEIn the presence of:Court Assistant: BerylMr. Ngetich Advocate holding brief for Mr. Mwaniki Advocate for the ApplicantNo attendance for the Respondent