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

High Court 3592 of 2013

REPUBLIC OF KENYA High Court at Kisumu Succession Cause 665 of 2007 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE VITALIS NG'ONGA MADIGO ….....................................................DECEASED AND IN THE MATER OF AN APPLICTAION BY: LEONARD ODINDI NG'ONGA …..........................................................................PETITIONER /RESPONDENT AND IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICTAION FOR REVOCATION OR ANNULMENT OF GRANT BY: CHARLES ODUGA NG'ONGA......APPLICANT RULING The applicant's application dated 23rd October 2012 prays that the grant confirmed and issued to the petitioner herein on 15th February 2011 be revoked and that restrictions be placed in parcels No. Siaya / Ojwando/ “A” 565, A 627, A 641, B2 / 370, A 712 and B2 368. The application supporting affidavit shows that the deceased left behind 13 other beneficiaries who included three (3) widows. He depones that the petitioner did not disclose this to the court when applying for this succession proceedings. I have perused the entire application as well as the attached letter from the area Chief. I also note that the petitioner/respondent was served on 17th December 2012 by one David Elvis Ochieng. The affidavit of service dated 17th December 2012 by the said process server shows that the appellant was duly served. In the premises and in the absence of any contrary objection to the application dated 23rd October 2012 the same is allowed as prayed with costs to the applicant. Dated, signed and delivered at Kisumu this 25th day of April, 2013. H.K. CHEMITEI JUDGE

page 1 of 2

In the presence of: …......................for the applicant .....................for the respondent HKC/aao

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.