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

High Court 7582 of 2014

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MILIMANI SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 1287 OF 2004 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF WAINAINA NJOROGE – (DECEASED) RULING 1. There is a pending application in this cause for the revocation of the grant made on 8th January 1993 in Kiambu Principal Magistrate Court Succession Cause No. 1 of 1992. The said application is dated 19th May 2004 and is brought at the instance of Mary Njoki, Monica Njeri and Sophia Njambi. 2. Pending hearing and determination of the summons dated 10th May 2004, the applicants to that application have moved this court, in a summons dated 1st November 2012, for preservatory orders. They complain that the administrator of the estate is doing acts that are detrimental to their occupation and enjoyment of the estate property pending the hearing and determination of the revocation application. 3. In reply to the application, the administrator swore an affidavit on 13th June 2012. He denies the allegations made by the applicants. 4. I take note of the pendency of the revocation application. Pending the distribution of the estate it is only fair that members of the family of the deceased be allowed to continue occupying the portion of the estate property that they have possession of. 5. I will allow the application dated 1st November 2012 in terms of prayer 4 of the application. The administrator is hereby directed to maintain status quo pending hearing and determination of the revocation application dated 10th May 2004. DATED, SIGNED and DELIVERED at NAIROBI this 31st DAY OF January, 2014. W. MUSYOKA JUDGE

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.

High Court 7582 of 2014 — Original judgment | Caselaw