Kilongosi v Kilongosi & 4 others [2025] KEHC 10575 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Civil Suit E025 of 2024
Judge
RC Rutto
The High Court at Machakos struck out a family land and succession-related suit for want of jurisdiction, holding the dispute belonged in the ELC and succession cause.
The Court of Appeal held that a purchaser could not claim adverse possession over deceased estate land bought from a non-administrator, and dismissed the appeal.
The Court of Appeal found that the 1st respondent, as administrator, unlawfully procured the renewal of the lease and transferred the suit property to herself before confirmation of grant, in violation of the Law of Succession Act. The subsequent sale to the 2nd and 3rd respondents was void as the 1st respondent lacked legal capacity to pass good title. The 2nd and 3rd respondents failed to conduct adequate due diligence on the root of the 1st respondent's title and could not be considered bona fide purchasers for value without notice. The High Court erred in failing to cancel the transfer an…
In re Estate of Misheck M’mboroki (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 9898 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Succession Cause 112 of 2008
Judge
SM Githinji
The court found that the 1st applicant, Robert Mutwiri Paulo, had been taken in by the deceased as his own son and was thus a dependant within the meaning of section 29(b) of the Law of Succession Act. The 1st respondent, while petitioning for the grant, had recognized the 1st applicant as a beneficiary but failed to provide for him in the distribution of the estate, amounting to concealment of a material fact. This omission satisfied the threshold for revocation of grant under section 76 of the Law of Succession Act. The 2nd applicant, Ruth Nkatha Rukaria, was found to be a purchaser and not…
In re Late Francis Muhiga Ndori (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 9708 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Succession Cause 164 of 1996
Judge
RN Nyakundi
The court found that the applicant failed to meet the threshold for injunctive relief, as she did not demonstrate irreparable harm or that the respondent's actions would result in loss that could not be compensated by damages. The respondent's construction, if unauthorized, would ultimately benefit the estate and not diminish it. However, the court determined that the grant of letters of administration issued to the respondent on 20th September 2024 was obtained without proper notice to interested parties and in the face of an existing valid grant, constituting grounds for revocation under se…
In re Estate of Nyambane Orindo (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 10426 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Probate & Administration E001 of 2024
Judge
WA Okwany
The High Court revoked an intestate grant for concealment of beneficiaries and trust property, and granted a temporary injunction against dealings with the estate.
In re Estate of the Late Alois Rotich Chepkong (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 9258 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Succession Cause 467 of 2015
Judge
RN Nyakundi
The High Court appointed a co-administrator and declined to confirm the grant immediately, directing further inventory, survey, and disclosure steps on the estate.
In re Estate of Mathew Kamiri Karanja (Deceased) [2025] KEHC 9510 (KLR)
Court
High Court
Case number
Succession Cause E035 of 2023
Judge
A Mshila
The court found that the respondent, by constructing a permanent structure on Githunguri/Riuki/1369, was intermeddling with the deceased's estate in contravention of Section 45 of the Law of Succession Act. The property in question had not yet been distributed or vested in any beneficiary, and the respondent lacked authority to undertake such actions. The applicant established a prima facie case for injunctive relief, demonstrated the risk of irreparable harm to the interests of other beneficiaries, and showed that the balance of convenience favored preservation of the estate pending proper d…
Thiga & another v Mhungi & 2 others (Sued on Behalf of Amamen Self-Help Group) [2025] KEELC 4603 (KLR)
Court
Environment and Land Court
Case number
Environment and Land Appeal E018 of 2024
Judge
MC Oundo
The court found that although the initial transfer and sale of the deceased's property before confirmation of grant constituted intermeddling and would ordinarily be void, the evidence established that the 1st Appellant was the instigator and active participant in the transaction. He advised his siblings, processed the title, and shared in the proceeds. The doctrine of clean hands and ex turpi causa non oritur actio precluded the Appellant from seeking to reverse the transaction on grounds of illegality in which he was complicit. The 2nd Respondent was found to be a bona fide purchaser for va…