[2006] KEHC 1545 (KLR)

[2006] KEHC 1545 (KLR)

The court found that Patrick Ndiema had already received his share of land from his late father in 1958, as corroborated by credible testimony from clan elders and documentary evidence. The land registered in the name of Makoni W/O Ndiema was determined to be held in trust for the estate of Eliud Ndiema, deceased,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] KEHC 1545 (KLR)
Parties
Applicant: Richard Nangaki Ndiema; Respondent: Patrick Ndiema
Court
High Court
Court Station
High Court at Bungoma
Jurisdiction
Kenya
Case Number
? 167 of 1996
Procedural Posture
Probate and Administration / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant
Outcome
objection dismissed
Legal Topics
Succession of Estates, Distribution of Land, Trusts Inheritance, Beneficiary Entitlement
Source Language
en
Family and Children Land and Property Succession of Estates Distribution of Land Trusts Inheritance Beneficiary Entitlement

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Nangaki Ndiema

Applicant

Patrick Ndiema

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Probate and Administration / Ruling on Summons for Revocation of Grant

  1. 1 Whether Patrick Ndiema is entitled to a share of land registered in the name of Makoni W/O Ndiema Kisembe as part of the estate of Ndiema Kisembe, deceased.
  2. 2 Whether the land registered in Makoni's name is held in trust for Patrick Ndiema or for the estate of Eliud Ndiema, deceased.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Patrick Ndiema had already received his share of land from his late father in 1958, as corroborated by credible testimony from clan elders and documentary evidence. The land registered in the name of Makoni W/O Ndiema was determined to be held in trust for the estate of Eliud Ndiema, deceased, who was a minor at the time of the original land allocation. The court concluded that Patrick Ndiema was not entitled to any further share of the land registered in Makoni's name, as he had already benefited from the estate through prior allocation. The objection was therefore dismissed, and the court ordered that each party bear their own costs.

Court Disposition

objection dismissed

Orders

  • The objection by Patrick Ndiema is dismissed.
  • Each party to bear his or her own costs.