Ikala & another v Ambani (Sued through his personal representative/administratrix Gladys Maraga alias Maraka); Sakha & another (Interested Parties)

on the sketch map annexed to the Claimants’ supporting adavit and marked “GS-2”) by adverse possession and should accordingly be registered as the owners thereof in place of the Respondent. 3. Issuance of an order as against the Respondent for the subdivision of land parcel number Tiriki/Cheptulu/805 in such a way as to have the aforesaid 0.07 Hectare portion hived therefrom and be transferred to the Claimants. 4. That the costs of this suit be provided for. 2. The respondent led memorandum of appearance on 16th April 2019. Thereafter, on 24th April 2019, the parties led a written consent settling the case by entering judgment in terms of prayers 2 and 3 of the OS with further order that the claimants/plaintis were to meet all the expenses of subdividing the suit property and transferring the 0.07 hectares portion to them. Each party was to meet own costs of the suit. The consent was adopted on 14th May 2019 and a decree issued on 17th May 2019. 3. The matter then remained dormant until 31st May 2023 when Notice of Motion dated 31st May 2023 was led by the above named intended interested parties. This ruling is in respect of the said Notice of Motion. 4. The following orders are sough in the Notice of Motion: 5. 1. That this application be certied as urgent and be heard exparte in the 1st instance. 2. That in the interim there be a stay of the orders made in this matter on 14/5/2019 vide a consent dated 24/4/2019, and any execution of the aforesaid orders pending the hearing and determination of this application. 3. That in the interim the proceedings led at Hamisi Senior Principal Magistrates Court being Hamisi Succession Cause No. 21 of 2017 be stayed pending further orders from this Court. 4. That upon grant of prayer 2 above the applicant herein Michael Musuku Sakha and Gladys Shanyisa w/o Joseph Shisakha be enjoined in this matters (sic) as interested parties. 5. That for the purpose of expeditions hearing and determination of this matter, the above le i.e. Kakamega ELC No 23 of 2019, ELC No 24 of 2029 and ELC No 25 of 2019 be consolidated and le Number Kakamega ELC No 23 of 2019 be the lead le. 6. That the consent dated 24/4/2019 and adopted by the Court on 14/5/2019 be set aside and the matter be reopened and be heard Viva Voce and denovo. 7. That the plainti and the defendant be restrained from further intermeddling with all that parcel of land known then as Tiriki/Cheptulu/805 and the resultant numbers being Tiriki/ Cheptulu/1743, 1744, 1745 and 1746 belonging to the deceased estate of Jairo Sakha Ambani by transferring, taking occupation, utilizing, developing and in any way dealing with the same pending the hearing and determination of the proceedings herein. 8. That cost of the application be provided for. The application is supported by an adavit sworn by Michael Musuku Sakha, the rst applicant. It is opposed through a replying adavit sworn by George Ikala, the rst claimant and another replying adavit sworn by Gladys Maraga alias Maraka, the respondent. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/21163/eng@2023-10-31 2

page 2 of 3

6. The application was canvassed through written submissions which the applicants, claimants and respondents duly led. I have considered application, the adavits, and submissions. The issue for determination is whether the reliefs sought should issue. 7. From the onset, it must be noted that the applicants are not parties in this suit. The suit was concluded on 14th May 2019 upon adoption of the consent. At the time the OS was led, the respondent was the administratrix of the estate of Jairo Sakha Ambani (deceased). The applicants have deposed in the adavit in support of the application that she remains the administratrix. the rst applicant contends that he is a son of the deceased while the second applicant is a widow of the deceased’s son. They claim that the consent was obtained through fraud, non-disclosure of material facts and without involving other beneciaries within the deceased’s estate. 8. As has been repeatedly held, fraud is a serious allegation that must be pleaded and proved to a standard above balance of probabilities but not beyond reasonable doubt. See Kuria Kiarie & 2 others v Sammy Magera [2018] eKLR and John Mbogua Getao v Simon Parkoyiet Mokare & 4 others [2017] eKLR. Beyond the allegations of fraud, the applicants have not oered any proof to the requisite standard. 9. It is manifest that the present application is an oshoot of disputes within the deceased’s estate. The applicants should resolve such disputes within the succession cause in respect of the deceased’s estate. 10. I nd no merit in Notice of Motion dated 31st May 2023 and I therefore dismiss it. In view of the relationship between the parties, I make no order as to costs. DATED, SIGNED, AND DELIVERED AT KAKAMEGA THIS 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2023. D. O. OHUNGO JUDGE Delivered in open court in the presence of: The First Plainti/Claimant present No appearance by the Second Plainti/Claimant No appearance by the Defendant/Respondent Mr Owuor holding brief for Mr Mshindi for the Applicants Court Assistant: E. Juma https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2023/21163/eng@2023-10-31 3

page 3 of 3