Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

Winnie Atieno Omondi vs Morris Lawrence Okwanyo Oturi and Jack Owino Oturi and 1 Others

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT OF KENYA AT SIAYA COUNTY COURT NAME: SIAYA ENVIRONMENT AND LAND COURT CASE NUMBER: ELCLPET/E005/2026 WINNIE ATIENO OMONDI VS MORRIS LAWRENCE OKWANYO OTURI AND JACK OWINO OTURI AND 1 OTHERS RULING The Petitioner has approached this court by way of petition dated 15/9/2026.Together with the petition she has also filed the notice of motion application dated 15/9/2026. The application was placed before me on 15/9/2026 and I certified it urgent and issued directions on its disposal for interpartes hearing on 17/9/2026. The Respondents have not responded to the petition. The matter proceeded in the absence of the respondents who were served as evidenced by the Affidavit of service sworn by Anungo Kaveta. The court invited counsel to address it on the issue of Locus standi which he did emphasizing emphasizing that there was no other forum she could go to have status quo preserved and that succession proceedings and citation would require time. I have also considered the grounds outlined in the application dated 15/9/2026 and submissions of counsel and the supporting affidavits on record and the gist of the petition and the subject and the prayers sought in the application. SIAYA RULING ELC PET E005 OF 2026 1

page 1 of 4

It is not in dispute that the subject parcel SOUTH GEM/GOMBE/946 is registered in the name of Jason Odila Nyaga and the title deed has been availed. The petitioner admits that she is not the legal representative but a direct beneficiary of the parcel by dint of what her deceased father being one of the sons of Jason would be entitled. She also states no succession has taken place. She wants to stop the burial of one Gideon Ngasa Adino to maintain the status quo of the parcel and the proposed portion for burial pending succession proceedings and distribution of the estate. Locus Standi it is trite goes to the roof of the court’s jurisdiction and without Jurisdiction the court cannot make one more step. Section 54 of the Law of the succession Act deals with provisions for limited grant of letters of admission. Any party may approach the court, High court or subordinate court for any purpose they require with regard to the estate of a deceased person. Under section 54‘A court may according to the circumstances of each case limit any grant of representation which it has jurisdiction to make in any of the forms described in the 5th schedule to this Act.’ Rule 73 of the Probate and Administration Rules provides for the inherent powers of the court to make such orders as may be necessary for ends of Justice or to prevent abuse of court process. SIAYA RULING ELC PET E005 OF 2026 2

page 2 of 4

Counsel has admitted there is no limited grant. They haven’t even tried to approach the relevant court under the provisions cited above. While I note the reasons expoused by counsel and the petitioner, I think this matter is not properly before this court firstly, for want of Locus standi on the petitioner and secondly for failure to exhaust the mechanisms that have been provided under the Law of Succession Act. It is the finding of this court that the petitioner lacks locus to move this court in the manner it has approached it. The court is guided by the following caselaw;1. Ragesh Pranjivan Chudasama Vs. Sailesh Pranjivan Chudasama (2014) eKLR 2. Owners of Motor Vessel Lilian S Vs. Caltex Oil (Kenya) Limited (1989) 1KLR 3. Troustic Union International & Another Vs. Mrs. Jane Mbeyu & Another (2008) 1KLR 730 4. The provisions of the of Law of succession Act and attendant Rules. The upshot of the above is that the petition and the application dated 15/9/2026 are hereby struck out for want of Locus and therefore Jurisdiction. Orders accordingly. Delivered and Dated This 17th Day of September 2026 SIAYA RULING ELC PET E005 OF 2026 3

page 3 of 4

HON. LADY JUSTICE DENA JUDGE 18/9/2026 Ruling delivered virtually through Microsoft teams Video Conferencing Platform in the presence of: Mr. Anungo for the Petitioner No appearance Respondents Court Assistant : Bwire. SIAYA RULING ELC PET E005 OF 2026 4

page 4 of 4

A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.