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

Julius Kithinji M’ikirima v Julieta Nduru Robert & 1 other

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU Succession Cause 235 of 1998 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MUSA KIRIMA KITHURE JULIUS KITHINJI M’IKIRIMA……………………..1ST PETITIONER VERSUS JULIETA NDURU ROBERT………………………2ND PETITIONER RULING This ruling relates only to the distribution of the intestate property of the deceased,Musa Kirima Kithure, consisting single parcel of land known as Abothuguchi/Gitie/408, measuring approximately 4.4. Hectares or 10.87 acres. The two joint administrators, Julius Kithinji M’Ikirima(Julius) and Julieta Nduru Robert(Julieta) have filed separate proposals suggesting the ratio of distribution to the eight beneficiaries. The two proposals do not agree and it was agreed by consent of counsel for both parties that the court proceeds to order distribution. The proposal by Julieta suggests distribution as follows; 1. Evangeline Kariungi – 1 acre 2. Florence Nyagera Kirima 3. Sarah Gakii 4. Robert Gitobu Mukindi 5. Erastus Kanini - 1 acre 6. Aireen Kanini - 1 acre 7. Stella Gachungi - 1 acre 8. Julius Kithinji M’Ikirima - 3.87 acres. - 1 acre - 1 acre - 1 acre On the other hand Julius proposal is as hereunder;

page 1 of 2

1. Geofrey Kooro Kithinji - 1 ½ acres 2. Charles Gituma - 1 ½ acres 3. Henry Muthui - 1 ½ acres 4. Gerald Gikunda - 1 ½ acres 5. Tarasira Mpandi - 1 ½ acres 6. Henry Gitonga Mburia - 1 ½ acres 7. Japheth Mburugu Mutemi - ½ acre 8. Margaret Gatabi - 1 acre 9. Julius Kithinji M’Ikirima - 1.87 acres Two issues stand out from the two lists of beneficiaries filed by Julieta and Julius. First, the only common name in the lists is that of Julius. The rest are persons whose fu ll identity and relationship with the deceased have not been disclosed. It is further observed that the initial affidavits of Marieta Mwari M’Ikirima, to whom the grant of letters of administration was issued, provide only her name and that of Julius as the only surviving beneficiaries. Similarly Julius in an affidavit in support of his application dated 12th June, 2001 was categorical that the deceased, Musa Kirima Kithure had two wives and was survived by seven daughters and himself (Julius). That, of the seven daughters, five are married and two are living on the property, Abothuguchi/Gitie 408. That affidavit does not provide the names of the seven daughters. However, in his proposal, Julius has listed 9 beneficiaries including himself but excluding Julieta. Of the 9 beneficiaries, it is clear, at least from their names, that only two are ladies. It is also of interest to note that in his application for confirmation of the grant, Julius sought orders vesting the said Abothuguchi/Gitie/408 to himself without disclosing the existence of the other beneficiaries. The second point is that the property earmarked for distribution is estimated to measure 10.89 acres, yet from Julius’ proposal this is exceeded. To explain these anomalies it is ordered that all the beneficiaries listed in the two proposals to appear before the court on 29th March, 2007 with their identification documents. DATED AND DELIVERED AT MERU THIS 8TH DAY OF JUNE 2007. W. OUKO JUDGE

page 2 of 2

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.