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

High Court 4867 of 2018

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITUI SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 5 OF 2016 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF BENJAMIN MUTHANGYA NGATI (DECEASED) BEATRICE KAMENE MUTHANGYA) JOHN KIMANZI MUTHANGYA)..........................ADMINISTRATORS RULING 1. Benjamin Muthangya Ngati (Deceased) died domiciled in Kenya on 16th May, 2004. Beatrice Kamene Muthangya and John Kimanzi Muthangya petitioned for grant of Letters of Administration Intestate (grant) of his Estate in their capacity as widow and son respectively. In the affidavit in support of the Petition they listed persons surviving the Deceased as follows: · Beatrice Kamene Muthangya – Widow. · John Kimanzi Muthangya – Son. · Isaac Mutuku Muthangya – Son. · Elijah Mutunga Muthangya – Son. · Peter Lumumba Muthangya – Son. 2. The grant was issued to the Petitioners on the 7th day of February, 2011. The Deceased left assets: · Mwingi/Mwingi/220. · Mwingi/Kanzau/268, 271, 272, 873, 880, 1696, 1721, 1759, 2964. The grant was confirmed on the 18th day of November, 2011. The Administrators of the Estate were to hold the entire Estate in trust for other beneficiaries. 3. On the 11th day of August, 2014, Kyambi Muthangya filed summons for revocation of the grant. She sought preservative orders that would restrain the Administrators from dealing with the land or from evicting her from the land. Kyambi Muthangya averred that she was the first wife of the Deceased and therefore a beneficiary of the Estate and she had sired children with the Deceased namely: · Syombua Muthangya. · Kasau Muthangya. · Kanini Muthangya. · Musili Muthangya. · Munanu Muthangya. All adults.

page 1 of 2

The allegations were denied by the Administrators. They argued that the Deceased’s first wife who was Deceased was Beatrice Muthangya who died in the year 2005 without any child. Jaden J determined the matter and reached a finding that the matter could only be determined by way of viva voce evidence and proceeded to preserve the Estate of the Deceased. 4. Subsequently Kyambi Muthangya died. Her Advocate, Mr. Kalili applied to cease representing her for none of her children were interested in the matter, an application that was granted. 5. Consequently the Administrators of the Estate approached the Court by way of Notice of Motion dated 29th day of March, 2018 seeking to be allowed to take vacant possession of the Estate of the Deceased; that the Court do order the occupants of the land belonging to the Deceased to vacate and the Court to lift the conservatory orders granted by the Court. 6. The application is premised on grounds that the Applicant (Kyambi Muthangya) died and none of her family members was interested in prosecuting the application. Beatrice Kamene Muthangya swore an affidavit in support of the application where she deponed that the Administrators were ordered to administer the Estate in accordance with the law and since Kyambi’s children did not wish to be substituted so as to prosecute the application, preservatory orders granted be lifted and occupants of the Estate of the Deceased be ordered to vacate. 7. The application by its nature was unopposed. 8. In her application Kyambi (now Deceased) urged the Court to find that the grant was obtained fraudulently by making of a false statement and concealing something material in respect of the Estate. 9. In her Ruling Jaden J made an order preserving the Estate and prohibiting the Administrators of the Estate from disposing or transferring to themselves the parcels of land that formed the Estate of the Deceased pending hearing of the application for revocation of the grant. 10. The Applicant having died and any other person having not expressed the intention to prosecute the application there is no reason why the orders should remain in force. In the premises I do lift the preservatory orders made by the Court. With regard to the 2 nd limb of the application, the Court is duty bound to ensure the Estate of a Deceased person is protected, however there is no indication of who the occupants of the parcel of the land are. Therefore this Court cannot make orders in vain. 11. It is so ordered. Dated, Signed and Delivered at Kitui this 31st day of July, 2018. L. N. MUTENDE 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.