Winfred Nkirote Muthuri & 1 other v Rosemary Kanario Terah

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT MERU SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 345 OF 2006 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF TERAH MUGUNA ANDREW (DECEASED) WINFRED NKIROTE MUTHURI...........................PETITIONER WINNIE MUKIRI....................................................APPLICANT VS ROSEMARY KANARIO TERAH......................RESPONDENT RULING Application dated 12th October 2015 was brought by applicants counsel M/S F.K.Gitonga and Company Advocates seeking that the court be pleased to grant an older of inhibition against land parcels No. Nyaki/Kithoka/2100, Ntima/Igoki/6696, Ntima/Igoki/6648 prohibiting any sale, transfer, lease, subdivision or any other form of interference whatsoever, pertaining to the aforementioned pieces of land pending the hearing and determination of this cause. The application near based on grounds on face of application and supporting affidavit Winfred Nkirote sworn on 12th October 2015. Applicant said that some of the beneficiaries of the deceased were in the process of sub dividing parcels of land in the estate and there were potential buyers and if allowed they would disinherit the rest of the beneficiaries. Application for confirmation dated 29th January 2015 by the administrator Winfred Nkirote Muthuri but before the application was he and she also filed application for inhibition. The applicant didn’t annex search certificate and or any documents to prove that parcels of land No. Nyaki/Kithoka/2100, Ntima/Igoki/6696 and Ntima/Igoki/6648 forms part of the estate of the late Terah Muguna Andrew. The deceased died on 9th October 2000 and according to annextures RKT1 to Rosemary Kanario Terahs Replying Affidavit shown on 16 th January 2016 parcel No. Nyaki/Kithoka/2100 was registered in the name of Muguna Investment Ltd on 5th September1997and 30th December 2014 it was transferred to Hodge Mutwiri Muguna. Parcel No. Ntima/Igoki/6696 is shown in search no 194/5 dated 14th May 2015 was registered in the name of Muguna Investment Ltd on 28.6.2004. The applicant has not proved why inhibitions shared be lodged in the parcels of land in question without proof of propriety rights. In the circumstances application is dismissed with costs to respondents.

page 1 of 2