[2008] KEHC 116 (KLR)
The court found that the affidavit of protest by Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu was unopposed and therefore accepted his evidence as correct. The court was satisfied with the justification provided for the unequal distribution of Parcel No. Kirimukuyu/Gachuiro/294, including the protestor's role in consolidating and...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2008] KEHC 116 (KLR)
- Parties
- Petitioner: Wilson Karibe Ndirangu; Petitioner: Eustace Mwangi; Petitioner: Caesar Mwangi Ndirangu; Objector: Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu; Objector: Charles Kariuki Ndirangu
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nyeri
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Miscellaneous Succession Cause 700 of 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Succession Cause / Judgment
- Outcome
- Protest allowed; grant confirmed as per protestor's proposal.
- Judges
- MM Kasango
- Legal Topics
- Succession, Distribution of Estate, Confirmation of Grant
- 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
Wilson Karibe Ndirangu
Petitioner
Eustace Mwangi
Petitioner
Caesar Mwangi Ndirangu
Petitioner
Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu
Objector
Charles Kariuki Ndirangu
Objector
Procedural Posture
Succession Cause / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the proposed distribution of LR NO. KIRIMUKUYU/GACHUIRO/294 and Plot No. 19 Ngunjiri Market is fair and in accordance with the law of succession.
- 2 Whether Caesar Mwangi Ndirangu, as an alleged purchaser, is entitled to inherit from the estate.
- 3 Whether the protestor's claim for a larger share of the estate is justified based on his contributions and circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the affidavit of protest by Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu was unopposed and therefore accepted his evidence as correct. The court was satisfied with the justification provided for the unequal distribution of Parcel No. Kirimukuyu/Gachuiro/294, including the protestor's role in consolidating and registering the property, paying the necessary fees, and supporting his siblings. The exclusion of Caesar Mwangi Ndirangu from inheritance of the parcel was accepted on the basis that he was a purchaser and not a beneficiary. The court confirmed the grant in accordance with the protestor's proposals, distributing the estate as set out in the judgment.
Court Disposition
Protest allowed; grant confirmed as per protestor's proposal.
Orders
- Parcel No. Kirimukuyu/Gachuiro/294 to be distributed as follows: Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu - 1.7 acres; Eustace Mwangi - 1.04 acres; Charles Kariuki - 1.03 acres; Wilson Karibe Ndirangu - 1.03 acres.
- Plot No. 19 Ngunjiri Market to be shared equally among Eustace Mwangi, Charles Kariuki, and Wilson Karibe Ndirangu.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
39 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT NYERI
SUCCESSION CAUSE 700 OF 2001
WILSON KARIBE NDIRANGU
& 2 OTHERS ………………………….…. PETITIONERS
Versus
STEPHEN KIRINGA NDIRANGU
CHARLES KARIUKI NDIRANGU …………… OBJECTORS
JUDGMENT
This judgment relates to affidavit of protest filed by Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu. Summons for confirmation of grant were applied for by the petitioner in an application dated 12th March 2007. In that application it was proposed that property LR NO. KIRIMUKUYU/GACHUIRO/294 be divided equally amongst;
a)Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu,
b)Eustace Mwangi,
c)Charles Kariuki,
d)Caesar Mwangi Ndirangu.
There was no provision made for Wilson Karibe Ndirangu. In respect of plot No. 19 Ngunjiri Market, the same was to be divided equally between;
1. Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu,
2. Eustace Mwangi,
3. Charles Kariuki and
4. Wilson Karibe Ndirangu
In the affidavit in protest Stephen Kiringa proposed that Parcel No. Kirimukuyu/Gachuiro/ 249 which is 4. 8 acres be divided as follows:
1. Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu - 1. 7 acres
2. Eustace Mwangi - 1. 04 acres
3. Charles Kariuki - 1. 03 acres
4. Wilson Karibe Ndirangu – 1. 03 acres
In respect of Plot No. 19 Ngunjuri Market he was in agreement with the proposal of the petitioner. The reason why he excluded the name of Caesar Mwangi in respect of the first property was because Caesar was said to be a purchaser and was therefore not entitled to inherit the land. He justified his larger portion of the first property by saying that at the time of demarcation their father who is the deceased in this succession was already dead. The other beneficiaries were very young. He however did not take advantage of their youth but processed the consolidation of their father’s property and had the property registered in their father’s name even though their father was by then deceased. He paid for the consolidation fees and annexed evidence of those receipts. Further he stated that since he was older than his brothers he sacrificially educated them and brought them up. He had one witness who confirmed that and swore an affidavit to that effect. The parties by a consent order of 15th October 2008 agreed for this matter to be heard by way of written submissions and further affidavit. By the time I sat to consider this judgment the respondent had not filed any papers in opposition to affidavit of protest. Accordingly I will take the affidavit of protest as being unopposed and as relaying the correct information. Accordingly the protestor does succeed in his case and the grant is hereby confirmed as follows:-
1. PARCEL NO. KIRIMUKUYU/GACHUIRO/294
a)Stephen Kiringa Ndirangu - 1. 7 acres
b)Eustace Mwangi - 1. 04 acres
c)Charles Kariuki - 1. 03 acres
d)Wilson Karibe Ndirangu – 1. 03 acres
2. PLOT NO. 19 NGUNJIRI MARKET to be shared equally amongst the following:-
a)Eustace Mwangi
b)Charles Kariuki
c)Wilson Karibe Ndirangu
3. There shall be no orders as to costs.
Dated and delivered this 15th day of December 2008
MARY KASANGO
JUDGE