High Court 3340 of 2026

3. e. The Petitioners/ Administrators have obtained necessary consents for confirmation of grant and distribution of the Estate herein. f. That this Honourable court has jurisdiction to grant the orders sought. The Summons is supported by the annexed affidavit dated 28th May 2025 sworn by DWM who deponed as follows: a. That we are the Petitioners/administrators herein of the Estate of SMN hence competent to swear this affidavit. b. That grant of letters of administration of our father's Estate was made to us by Eldoret High Court on 10th day of February, 2023. c. That the Deceased was survived by the following: 1st House a. JMM Daughter b. AWK Daughter c. MMM Deceased d. JKM Son e. AWM Daughter f. VNM Daughter g. EKM Son h. SNM Daughter i. PWM Daughter nd 2 House a. DWM Widow b. JMM Daughter c. EWM Daughter d. LMM Daughter e. JWM Daughter d. That the deceased is not survived by other dependants. e. That no application for provision for dependants and shared of all persons’ beneficiary entitled to the said estate have been ascertained and determined as follows: - https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 2

page 2 of 25

Assets Beneficiary Share Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX DWM Whole as a Life interest Eldoret Pioneer/Langas Block X (Malel)XXX. To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX (Mwenderi) JKM Soy Plot JMM AWK VNM PWM Whole MMM To be sub-divided and shared equally JMM EWM LMM JWM To be sub-divided and shared equally Eldoret Plot Outspan EKM Whole Eldoret Langas Plot JMM AWK MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM To be sub-divided and shared equally [Particulars School Plot Withheld] Nakuru Miti Mingi/ Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Nakuru Miti Mingi/ Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Nakuru Plot Mwareki To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Kiamba Farm (Mudavadi Farm). JMM EWM LMM JWM To be sub-divided and shared Elgon View Plot Damaris Waceke Whole https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 3

page 3 of 25

f. 4. Motor Vehicle Registration Number KBZ XXXP Toyota Fielder Damaris Waceke Motor Vehicle Registration Number KAW XXXK G. Touring JKM Shares At Standard Charted Bank To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Shares at KCB To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Money At Barclays/ Absa Bank Account No. 0031XXX To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries Shares at KenGen To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries That no estate duty is payable in Kenya in respect of the Estate. The Summons was opposed by one JKM, the 1st Petitioner herein vide a Replying Affidavit in which he deponed as follows: a. That I am one of the Petitioners/Administrators of the Estate of the deceased herein Samuel Mungai. b. That my co-petitioner/Administrator’s application dated 28th day of May 2025 has been brought to my attention and I wish to respond thereto as follows: - c. That it is true that the Letters of Administration intestate to the estate of the deceased were issued in favour of the Administrator on 10th February 2023 and that over six months have lapsed. d. That I have looked at the Supporting Affidavit of DWM my co-administrator and I have consulted all the beneficiaries of the first house and I wish to depone on their behalf as follows: - e. That my step mother DWM was married by the deceased in April 1990. f. That at the time she got married to the deceased, most of the properties listed as assets of the deceased had been acquired by my late mother and the deceased. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 4

page 4 of 25

g. That she cannot therefore lay claim against those properties since she is not entitled to them and her children. h. That all those properties acquired before she got married are listed in paragraph 3(a) of the Replying Affidavit. i. That my siblings and I are therefore not in agreement with the mode of distribution as proposed by my Co-Administrator. j. That the first house beneficiaries therefore propose that the estate of the deceased be shared as follows: - https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 5

page 5 of 25

No Asset Beneficiary 1. Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX First house second house 2. Eldoret Pioneer/ Langas Block X (Malel)/XXX First house Whole 3. Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX First house Whole 4. Soy Plot First house second house 5. [Particulars Withheld] School Plot First House Whole 6. Eldoret Outspan MM Whole 7. Eldoret Langas Plot First house Whole 8. Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) First house Whole 9. Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) Second House Whole 10. Nakuru Mwariki Unknown to us 11. Kiambaa Farm (Mudavadi Farm) First house second house 12. Elgon View Plot Unknown to us 13. Motor Vehicle Registration Number KBZ XXX Toyota Fielder To be sold Plot https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 Share and and and ½ share each ½ share each ½ share each Share equally proceeds 6

page 6 of 25

5. 14. Motor Vehicle Registration Number KAW XXXG Touring JKM Whole 15. Shares of Standard Chartered First House Whole 16. Shares at KCB First House Whole 17. Money at Barclays Bank Account Number 0031XXX First and second House Equal share 18. Shares at Kengen First and second house Equal Share This Court vide its Ruling dated 7th November 2025 referred this matter to the Court Annexed Mediator one Mr. Valentine Wandera and directed that the mediation to be concluded with sixty (60) days from the date of the Ruling. Consequently, this Honourable Court gave its Ruling dated 26th January 2026 based on the Mediation Agreement by the parties where it adopted the Mediation Agreement by the parties. In particular, this Court held as follows; By Application of the law, the partial mediation agreement duly signed by the beneficiaries and subsequently countersigned by the Court Annexed Mediator Mr. Wandera dated 12.1.2026 be and is hereby adopted as a court judgement capable of being implemented by issuance of a partial certificate of confirmation of grant by the Deputy Registrar of the High Court for endorsement by my office. In so far as the residual inventory assets are concerned as itemized elsewhere in this ruling the following directions shall abide: 6. a. That both parties or each of the beneficiaries is invited by the court to file affidavit evidence suggestive on how he or she thinks fit the assets ought to be distributed to the beneficiaries. b. That the administrators duly appointed by this court under Section 66 of the Law of Succession Act do file summons for confirmation of grant providing leadership by giving the mode in which they think best the rest of the estate as referred back to court should be distributed amongst beneficiaries c. That a Status Conference be held on 18.2.2026 for purpose of scheduling the matter for Judgement. Compliance with these orders is indispensable by any of the beneficiaries to the estate. A partial Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 18th February 2026 was issued with the following distribution matrix; https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 7

page 7 of 25

Name Description of Property Share Of Heirs (Deceased MM's Children) SMM JKM SWN Pioneer/Ngeria 1(EATEC)7XXX House No 1 JMM AWK MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM Eldoret Langas Plot Equally JKM Motor Vehicle Reg No. Kaw XXXK G. Touring Whole JMM AWK MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Shares at Standard Bank, KCB and Ken-Gen To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries of the Estate JMM AWK MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Money at Barclays Bank and ABSA To be shared equally after all liabilities have been paid (Net Sum) Block Whole 7. Thereafter, the beneficiaries in this intestate Succession Cause were directed by this Honourable Court to file affidavit evidence suggestive on they think fit the assets ought to be distributed to them. 8. Consequently, from the above directions, the 1st Petitioner herein JKM filed an Affidavit in support of Summons for Confirmation of Grant dated 16th February 2026 and deponed as follows: a. That I am one of the Petitioners/Administrators of the estate of the late SWN representing the first house. b. That I am conversant with the facts of this case and I wish to deponed to the matters below on behalf of the beneficiaries of the first house. c. That I am aware that the parties herein have already agreed on the sharing of part of the estate of the deceased by way of mediation and that this Honourable court directed by its ruling of 26th January 2026 that the parties should by way of affidavit show how the residual assets should be shared. d. That in compliance with the court's orders, the first house proposes that the residuary of the estate be shared as per the attached mode of distribution. e. That I wish to clarify a few issues as follows; - f. That as regards Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX the proceeds for buying the property was from the sale of a family property acquired long before the second house came into existence. The property in Moiben/Chebororwa farm was bought using money from the shop ran by our mother SW and the sale of EATEC farm. The property should therefore be shared equally between the two families. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 8

page 8 of 25

9. g. That in respect of Eldoret Pioneer/Langas Block X (Malel)/XXX which was purchased in 1985 by the eldest daughter of SM when she was working at the late Mrs Mungai's shop, the property was allocated to EK who stays there and has all along been collecting rent from the property. h. That EK has all along collected rent for himself even during the deceased livelihood. i. That in regard to Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX the property was purchased in the 1970s and was given to me. I have since developed the property using my own funds. j. That, the Soy plot can be shared equally between the two sons. k. That as regards the [Particulars Withheld] Plot, the plot was acquired by my mother SWM in 1970 and therefore exclusively belongs to the first house. l. That as regards Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk block 9/XXX and 2XX, the properties can be shared equally between the two sons of both families. m. That as regards Nakuru Mwariki plot, it can be shared in equal shares by both families. n. That in respect of motor vehicle registration number KBZ XXXP, it can be sold and proceeds shared equally. o. That the shares that belonged to Mzee in Racecourse neighbours group can be shared equally between the two families. p. That in our view as the first family, this reflects a fair and equitable distribution of the residuary of the estate of the deceased. q. That there is a refund of Kshs.1, 448,924 to me as per Mpesa statement being upkeep for the second family marked as annexture JKM 4. r. That there was contribution of Kshs. 2,000,000 in purchase of Eldoret Municipality/Block4/ XX by me. The 2nd Petitioner also annexed a Consent of the mode of distribution signed by the members of the 1st House which was coached in the following language; We the undersigned being the children of the first house of the deceased herein SWN who died intestate on 6th of April 2019 do hereby give our consent for the distribution of the deceased's estate in the under listed manner. 1st Family Wife, late SWM married in the 1950'sHad nine children between 1958 and 1979.Mrs. SW died in 1983.She was a business woman and a farmer. Mrs. SW was a business woman running a retail shop in Eldoret town from 1968 till her demise and together with her husband had acquired a number of properties. Most of the record/title deeds were destroyed in 2007 during the PEV clashes when our home was completely destroyed by fire. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 9

page 9 of 25

2nd Family Wife Damaris Wacheke was married in April 1990 and has been a housewife. She has four children. Distribution of Properties https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 10

page 10 of 25

No. Asset Beneficiary Share 1. Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX The proceeds of buying this property was from the sale of Moiben / Chebororwa farm and the farm produce (crops i.e. wheat, maize and beans. During our meeting it had been agreed by Mzee that we develop the property into a business venture being a prime land. There was also a room that had been given to PW to stay. Should remain for the entire family. 2. (Eldoret pioneer/ Langas Block1 Malel)/XXX Plot purchased in 1985. EK has been staying in this property for over 25 years and has been his responsibility in running it/ collection of rent from 2017 Whole 3. Eldoret Municipality Purchased in 1970's Property had JM https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 11

page 11 of 25

Block XXX 15/ been given to JM who has developed it and has been running it 4. Soy Plot Equal Share 5. [Particalars Withheld] School This property was purchased in 1970 by Mrs. SWM. As per the land records and the process of transferring the land to our father SM had just been completed after his demise and the title deeds are yet to be released. Vivian has been staying in this property and has developed it and connected water and electricity. Should be given to the first family 6. Eldoret Municipality Pioneer/ Ngeria block Mzee in his meetings had given it to his nephews (EATEC)/7XXX Late M's Children (M sons) M is deceased 7. Eldoret/ Langas This property was bought in the early 1980.The property has been home for years and First family https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 12

page 12 of 25

was burnt down during the PEV. (Trying to rebuild the house) 8. Eldoret Ngeria/ Kabogo Block 3(Kiamba)/ XXX Second family 9. Nakuru Miti Mingi/ Mbaruk block9/XXX Either Family or be sold and proceeds distributed equally 10. Nakuru Miti Mingi/ Mbaruk block9/XXX Either Family or be sold and proceeds distributed equally 11. Nakuru/ Mwariki plot Sons 12. Motor vehicle KBZ XXXP Equal share 13. Motor vehicle KAW XXXK 14. Shares at standard bank Equal shares 15. Barclays bank / ABSA Equal shares 16. KenGen shares Equal shares 17. Racecourse neighbours Group shares Equal shares 18. Liabilities Was given to JM by Mzee Money paid 2, 000,000/- https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 JM JM 13

page 13 of 25

toward purchase of ELD/BL4/ XX, Borrowed from Mr. AM and paid to the Children's Community Society by Mr. MS. 19. 10. Money paid in support nd of 2 family upkeep Paid by Mpesa as per attached Mpesa statement JM The Summons was canvassed by way of written submissions. 1st Petitioner’s Submission Summary 11. The 1st Petitioner filed his written submissions dated 2nd March 2026. The learned counsel for the 1st Petitioner, Mr. Kitiwa submitted that the 2nd Petitioner had filed an application for confirmation of summons in respect of the estate of the deceased, who was polygamous. The 1st Petitioner represents the first family, while the 2nd Petitioner represents the second family. The 1st Petitioner, being dissatisfied with the proposed mode of distribution, filed a Replying Affidavit and a Further Affidavit dated 16th February 2026, setting out their preferred mode of distribution and supporting reasons. 12. Mr. Kitiwa submitted that during mediation, a Partial Mediation Agreement dated 8th January 2026 had resolved the distribution of certain properties as follows: - 13. a. Pioneer/Ngeria Block X EATEC – to the children of the 1st family (M). b. Eldoret Langas Plot – to be shared among members of the 1st family. c. Motor Vehicle KAW XXXK – to JK. d. Shares in Standard Bank, KCB and KenGen – to be sold with proceeds equally shared among all beneficiaries. e. Money at Barclays – to be shared equally after settling liabilities. Counsel further submitted that the outstanding properties and liabilities requiring determination by the court included Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX, Pioneer/Langas Block 1 (Malel)/XXX, Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX, Soy Plot, [Particulars Withheld] School Plot, Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Blocks 9/XXX and 9/XXX, Nakuru Mwareki Plot, Kiambaa Farm, Motor Vehicle KBZ XXXP-Toyota Fielder, and Racecourse shares, as well as liabilities totaling approximately Kshs. 2,000,000 and upkeep payments made to the second family. Regarding specific properties, Mr. Kitiwa submitted: - https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 14

page 14 of 25

14. a. Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX – acquired before the second family, partially funded by proceeds from the sale of the EATEC farm and the late first wife’s business, including contributions of Kshs. 2,000,000; it should be shared equally among all beneficiaries. b. Pioneer/Langas Block 1 (Malel)/XXX – purchased in 1985, occupied by EK prior to the deceased’s demise; it should be allocated to him as donatio mortis causa. c. Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX – undisputedly allotted to JK and should remain with him. d. Soy Plot – should be shared equally among all beneficiaries due to disagreement between parties. e. [Particulars Withheld] School Plot (Block 14/280) – originally belonging to the first wife; should be shared among the first family members. f. Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Blocks 9/XXX and 9/XXX – to be sold with proceeds equally shared. g. Nakuru Mwareki Plot – to be shared among the sons of the family. h. Kiambaa Farm (Mudavadi Farm) – to be shared equally among the second family, as agreed. i. Racecourse shares – to be equally shared among both families. j. Motor Vehicle KBZ XXXP-Toyota Fielder – to form part of the free estate and be sold with proceeds equally distributed. On liabilities, the learned counsel submitted that upkeep provided to the second family totaling Kshs. 1,448,924 should be recognized as a liability of the estate and deducted accordingly. In conclusion, Mr. Kitiwa prayed that the Honourable Court distribute the estate in accordance with the 1st Petitioner’s proposed mode of distribution. 2nd Petitioner’s Submissions Summary 15. The 2nd Petitioner here in filed her submissions dated 23rd February 2026 through her learned Counsel Mr. Mathai Maina. The learned counsel for the 2nd Petitioner, Mr. Mathai submitted that the application dated 28th May 2025 seeks the confirmation of the Grant of Letters of Administration Intestate issued on 10th February 2023 in the Estate of the late SMN in favour of JKM and DWM as the Petitioners and Administrators of the estate. 16. Counsel submitted that the deceased contracted a polygamous marriage having had two wives, and therefore the distribution of the estate must be governed by the principles applicable to polygamous intestacy under section 40 of the Law of Succession Act (Cap 160). He explained that section 40 requires that where a deceased person was married under a system permitting polygamy, the estate must first be divided among the houses according to the number of children in each house, with the surviving wife being counted as an additional unit, after which distribution within each house should follow the provisions of sections 35, 36, 37 and 38 of the Act. 17. Counsel further submitted that before distributing the estate, the court must determine the free property of the deceased, as defined under section 3 of the Law of Succession Act, which describes free property as property that the deceased was legally competent to dispose of during his lifetime and whose interest did not terminate upon death. In that regard, counsel informed the court that the parties had identified several properties forming part of the estate, including parcels of land in Eldoret and https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 15

page 15 of 25

Nakuru, motor vehicles, shares in Standard Chartered Bank, KCB and KenGen and money held at Barclays/ABSA Bank. 18. Mr. Mathai further submitted that the court must also identify the beneficiaries and dependants of the deceased in accordance with section 29 of the Law of Succession Act, which recognizes wives, children and other relatives who were maintained by the deceased prior to his death as dependants. He informed the court that the parties had mutually agreed on the beneficiaries from the two houses, which include the children of the first house and those of the second house together with the surviving spouse. 19. Counsel emphasized that under the Law of Succession Act and the Constitution, succession law does not discriminate on the basis of gender or marital status. In support of this position, he relied on Eliseus Mbura M’Thara Vs Harriet Ciambaka & Another [2012] eKLR, where the court held that all children of a deceased person, whether male or female, married or unmarried, have equal rights to inherit from the estate of their parent. 20. Mr. Mathai further submitted that the distribution of the estate must reflect the principles of equality and equity, particularly where the deceased had multiple households. He argued that the unit distribution formula under section 40 ensures fairness by allocating shares proportionately to each house based on the number of beneficiaries. Counsel also noted that the surviving spouse should retain rights over her matrimonial home and life interest, especially where she had been in occupation during the lifetime of the deceased, so as to avoid discrimination and uphold the principle of equality under Article 27 of the Constitution. 21. Counsel also submitted that the properties forming part of the estate were identified and agreed upon during mediation and therefore none of the beneficiaries can subsequently claim personal contribution towards their acquisition without evidence. He argued that since the partial mediation agreement has not been set aside the court should rely on the list of agreed properties and proceed with distribution on that basis. Mr. Mathai urged the court to confirm the grant and adopt the proposed mode of distribution presented in the application dated 28th May 2025, which he submitted is consistent with the Law of Succession Act, the principles of equitable distribution under section 40 and the constitutional requirement of equality and non-discrimination among beneficiaries. 22. The learned counsel, Mr. Mathai submitted that during mediation, the parties agreed on the distribution of the Deceased MM's estate as follows; 23. a. Pioneer/Ngeria Block X (EATEC) 7XXX – to be shared among the three children of the Deceased: Samwel Mungai M, JKM, and SWN. b. Eldoret Langas Plot – originally forming the life interest of the first wife, now deceased, to be shared equally among her nine children. c. Motor Vehicle Registration No. KAW XXXG G Touring – to be given to JKM, who was in possession prior to the Deceased’s death. d. Shares in Standard Bank, KCB, and KenGen – to be sold with proceeds equally shared among all beneficiaries. e. Money at Barclays/ABSA – to be distributed equally among beneficiaries after settlement of liabilities. Counsel further submitted that under Section 37 of the Law of Succession Act, the surviving spouse retains a life interest in matrimonial property. Accordingly, the first wife’s life interest in Eldoret Langas Plot, now deceased, is to be inherited equally by her nine children and the second wife’s matrimonial https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 16

page 16 of 25

home at Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX forms part of her life interest, and it is submitted that this parcel be bequeathed to her. Regarding motor vehicles: - 24. a. The second wife was in possession of Motor Vehicle KBZ XXXP Toyota Fielder, used for the Deceased’s transport, and it should remain with her. b. The first petitioner retains Motor Vehicle KAW XXXG G Touring, as agreed during mediation due to prior possession. On the distribution of remaining free estate property, Mr. Mathai submitted that the second petitioner’s proposed mode of distribution, grounded in the Constitution, the Law of Succession, and principles of equity, should be adopted, noting that Elgon View should be excluded as it was not part of the agreed free estate. Analysis and Determination 25. Having carefully considered the rival affidavits, the consent filed by the First House beneficiaries, and the written submissions of both counsel, the court now proceeds to determine the distribution of the residual estate. 26. The estate of the late SMN falls to be distributed under Part V of the Law of Succession Act, Cap. 160 of the Laws of Kenya. Since the deceased contracted marriage under a system permitting polygamy, the specifically applicable provision is Section 40 of the Act. Section 40(1) of the Law of Succession Act provides verbatim as follows: “ Where an intestate has married more than once under any system of law permitting polygamy, his personal and household effects and the residue of the net intestate estate shall, in the first instance, be divided among the houses according to the number of children in each house, but also adding any wife surviving him as an additional unit to the number of children." 27. Section 40(2) of the Law of Succession Act further provides as follows: “ The distribution of the personal and household effects and the residue of the net intestate estate within each house shall then be in accordance with the rules set out in sections 35 to 38." 28. Section 35(1) of the Law of Succession Act, governing the entitlement of a surviving spouse upon intestacy, provides as follows: “ (1) 29. Subject to the provisions of section 40, where an intestate has left one surviving spouse and a child or children, the surviving spouse shall be entitled to— (a) the personal and household effects of the deceased absolutely; and (b) a life interest in the whole residue of the net intestate estate: Provided that, if the surviving spouse is a widow, that interest shall determine upon her re-marriage to any person.” Section 3 of the Law of Succession Act defines the free property of a deceased person as property which the deceased was legally competent to dispose of during his lifetime and the interest in which did not terminate upon his death. The properties forming the residual estate in this cause are properties https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 17

page 17 of 25

registered in the deceased's name as agreed upon during mediation, and they therefore form part of the free estate of the deceased. 30. Even as I consider a proper distribution matrix in this last stretch, I am also mindful of the various provisions of the Constitution relevant to the issues at hand. Article 27 of the Constitution of Kenya, 2010 guarantees equality and freedom from discrimination and prohibits discrimination on any ground, including gender and marital status. Article 28 guarantees the inherent dignity of every person and the right to have that dignity respected and protected. Article 40 protects the right of every person to acquire and own property. These provisions must inform the manner in which this court gives effect to the Law of Succession Act. As the Court of Appeal observed in Rono Vs Rono & Another [2005] 1 KLR, the Law of Succession Act must be construed in a manner consistent with the constitutional values of equality, non-discrimination and dignity. 31. The court must first establish the unit composition of the two houses so as to determine the proportionate share of each house in the residual estate. It is common ground that the first wife, SWM, predeceased the deceased, having died in 1983 some thirty-six years before the deceased's own death on 6th April 2019. Because she did not survive the deceased, she does not constitute an additional unit within the meaning of Section 40(1), which speaks only of 'any wife surviving him.' The First House is therefore represented solely by its nine children. The Second House is represented by the surviving widow, DWM, plus her four children, constituting five units. The unit computation is therefore as follows: House Wife Children Units First House SWM (deceased — did not survive intestate) 9 9 Second House DWM widow) 4 5 13 14 TOTAL (surviving 32. The First House accordingly holds a 9/14 proportionate entitlement in the residual estate, while the Second House holds a 5/14 proportionate entitlement. Within the Second House, and by operation of Section 40(2), DWM receives a share equal to that of one child being 1/5 of the Second House's 5/14 allocation, while each of the four children of the Second House similarly receives 1/5 of the Second House's allocation. Within the First House, each of the nine children shares equally in the First House's 9/14 proportion, save that the 1/9 share attributable to the late MMM devolves equally to her three children, namely SMM, JKM and SWN, each receiving a 1/3 share of their late mother's entitlement. 33. Having perused through the record in its entirety, the most contested issue in this matter is the disposition of Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX. The 2nd Petitioner proposes that this parcel be allocated to DWM as her matrimonial home. The 1st Petitioner proposes an equal split between the two houses. The court has considered both positions carefully and holds, for the reasons set out below, that Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX shall vest absolutely and unconditionally in DWM. 34. The evidence before the court demonstrates that DWM has continuously occupied Block 4/XX as her established matrimonial home from the time of her marriage to the deceased in 1990 through to the present day. This occupation was within the knowledge and acquiescence of the deceased during https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 18

page 18 of 25

his lifetime. It is the only residential home she has known within the context of this marriage. The court notes that Kenyan courts have consistently held that a probate court ought not to disturb the established matrimonial home of a surviving widow where no compelling reason exists to do so. 35. The court rejects the argument by the First House that Block 4/XX was acquired using resources associated with the first family and therefore ought to be shared equally between the two houses. I say so for the following three reasons. First, both parties accepted Block 4/XX as part of the estate's inventory during mediation. The Partial Mediation Agreement proceeded on the basis that Block 4/ XX forms part of the free estate of the deceased. Having so agreed and having obtained orders of this court adopting that agreement, the First House is estopped from subsequently mounting a proprietary claim over the property on grounds of alleged acquisition history. Second, even if contributions were made from resources associated with the first family, those contributions, absent any formal trust, transfer or declaration of beneficial interest registered against the title, do not operate to confer on the First House any superior proprietary entitlement over and above what the Law of Succession Act prescribes. Third, the sum of Kshs. 2,000,000 allegedly contributed by the 1st Petitioner personally towards the purchase of Block 4/XX is supported only by his bare assertion without independent corroboration. A beneficiary cannot prefer a personal contribution claim over the estate on the basis of unverified averments. 36. The court further holds that the proper legal characterization of the allocation of Block 4/XX to DWM is not as a life interest as proposed by the 2nd Petitioner herself, but as an absolute and unconditional interest. Section 35(1)(b) of the Law of Succession Act grants a surviving spouse a life interest in the whole residue of the net intestate estate, but this provision is expressly made "subject to section 40." It is therefore Section 40 that governs the nature and extent of the surviving wife's entitlement in a polygamous estate, and Section 35(1)(b) yields to it. Section 40(2) provides that the surviving wife of a house shall receive a share equal to that of one child. The children of the Second House take their shares absolutely as they are outright beneficial owners with full powers of ownership, alienation and transmission upon death. Since Section 40(2) expressly equates the wife's share to that of one child, the character of her entitlement must mirror that of a child's share in every respect. It is not merely the quantum that is equated. It is the nature of the interest itself. 37. In the current matter the deceased elected to be polygamous and as reduced from the record he was blessed with both sons and daughters. It is evident that the scope of distribution has to cover the children from each house and their respective spouses. The status of the doctrine of legitimate expectations in a broader range requires that the surviving spouses’ legal rights over their matrimonial homes be secured especially those in occupation during the lifetime of the deceased. In essence the spouses will have a right to their homes for their life in addition to the life interests. However, where already there was no matrimonial home it is necessary to make provisions for it in the distribution to avoid the effect of discrimination under Article 27 of the Constitution between spouses. 38. Accordingly, from the above, DWM's entitlement to her allocated share of this estate vests in her absolutely and the allocation of Block 4/XX as the physical embodiment of that share is made free of any life interest, trust, condition or reversionary interest whatsoever. A claim for reimbursement 39. The 1st Petitioner claims reimbursement from the estate of a sum of Kshs. 1,448,924 allegedly paid by him as upkeep for the Second House, supported by Mpesa transaction statements. He also claims Kshs. 2,000,000 allegedly contributed towards the purchase of Block 4/XX. The court finds both claims unmeritorious and dismisses them https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 19

page 19 of 25

40. With respect to the upkeep claim, the provision of financial support by one branch of a family to another does not, without more, create a legally enforceable debt against the deceased's estate. Maintenance of one household by another during the lifetime of the deceased or after is a moral and social obligation, not a contractual one capable of founding a claim against the estate. The Mpesa statements annexed establish only that funds were sent; they do not establish any obligation on the part of the estate to refund those sums. This claim is rejected. 41. With respect to the Kshs. 2,000,000 claim, the court has already addressed this in the context of Block 4/XX above. Beyond the 1st Petitioner's bare averment, no independent evidence, no acknowledgement of debt, no agreement, no contemporaneous record has been produced to substantiate this claim. The Law of Succession Act does not entitle a beneficiary to a preferential deduction from the estate on account of unproven personal contributions. This claim is likewise rejected. 42. Having determined the disposition of Eldoret Municipality Block 4/XX and the claim for reimbursement, the court now turns to the distribution of the remaining residual assets. Unless the parties themselves expressly proposed sale of a given asset, the court shall order sub-division and allocation between the two houses in the proportionate ratio of 9/14 to the First House and 5/14 to the Second House, each house thereafter distributing its allocation equally among its members. Eldoret Pioneer/Langas Block X (Malel)/XXX 43. Both the 2nd Petitioner's proposed distribution schedule and the First House's own consent document record that EKM has occupied and managed this property for a period exceeding twenty-five years, collecting rental income from it throughout that period, including during the deceased's lifetime. This long and uninterrupted occupation, acquiesced in by the deceased himself, distinguishes this property from the general estate. The court accordingly allocates this property wholly to EKM as his individual share within the First House's 9/14 entitlement. Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX (Mwenderi) 44. Both parties are largely in agreement that this property was given to JKM by the deceased during his lifetime and that JK has since developed it at his own expense. There is no contest on this point. The property is allocated wholly to JKM as his individual share within the First House's 9/14 entitlement. Eldoret Plot Outspan 45. The 1st Petitioner proposes this property for the late MMM's estate. The 2nd Petitioner proposes it for EKM. The court observes that both proposals confine this asset within the First House. I have not seen any party advance a claim for the Second House over this parcel. The court further notes that EKM has already received Pioneer/Langas Block 1 (Malel)/XXX as his individual allocation. In the interests of equitable distribution within the First House, and having regard to the position of the 1st Petitioner who represents the First House, the Eldoret Outspan Plot is allocated to the estate of the late MMM, to devolve equally to her three children namely SMM, JKM and SWN, as their share within the First House's entitlement. [Particulars Withheld] School Plot 46. The [Particulars Withheld] Plot is genuinely contested. The 1st Petitioner asserts that it was acquired by the late SWM in 1970, long before the second marriage, and that it should therefore go exclusively to the First House. The 2nd Petitioner proposes that it be sub-divided among JMM, EWM, LMM and https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 20

page 20 of 25

JWM of the Second House. The court has carefully weighed both positions. The First House's own consent document confirms that the title was only transferred into the deceased's name after his death and that the property was originally purchased by Mrs. SW in 1970. VNM of the First House has been in occupation of this property and has developed it. The acquisition of this property predated the second marriage by two decades and the evidence of Mrs. SW's ownership is uncontroverted. In these circumstances the court finds that the equities favour the First House. The [Particulars Withheld] Plot is accordingly allocated to the First House to be sub-divided equally among the nine children of the First House, with the share of the late Mirriam M devolving equally to her three children. Soy Plot 47. The 2nd Petitioner proposes that the Soy Plot be sub-divided among five specific First House female children. The 1st Petitioner's consent document records it as an equal share among both families. Since both sides agree on sharing and the consent document of the First House expressly concedes a share to both families, the court orders that this plot be sub-divided and allocated in the proportionate ratio of 9/14 to the First House, to be shared equally among the nine children of the First House, and 5/14 to the Second House, to be shared equally among DWM and her four children in equal portions. Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) 48. The 1st Petitioner proposes that this parcel goes wholly to the Second House. The 2nd Petitioner proposes sale and equal sharing. The First House's consent document records it as going to either family or to be sold with proceeds equally distributed. Given that the 1st Petitioner has himself conceded the Second House's entitlement over this parcel, and the 2nd Petitioner has proposed equal sharing among all, this court orders that Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Block 9/XXX be sub-divided and allocated in the ratio of 9/14 to the First House and 5/14 to the Second House, each house sharing its portion equally among its members. Nakuru Mwareki Plot 49. The 1st Petitioner and the First House's consent document both suggest this plot be shared among the sons of both families. The 2nd Petitioner proposes sale and equal sharing. The court is alive to the fact that the Second House has no male children. Restricting this asset to sons would wholly exclude the Second House, which this court cannot sanction in the face of Section 40 and the constitutional principle of non-discrimination. The court orders that this plot be sub-divided and allocated in the proportionate ratio of 9/14 to the First House and 5/14 to the Second House, each house thereafter sharing its portion equally among all its members. Kiambaa Farm (Mudavadi Farm / Ngeria/Kabogo Block X Kiamba/XXX) 50. The First House's own consent document expressly records that Kiambaa Farm goes to the Second family. The 2nd Petitioner proposes that it be sub-divided equally among the four children of the Second House. Given this convergence of positions, the court orders that Kiambaa Farm be allocated wholly to the Second House and sub-divided equally among the members of the Second House, namely DWM, JMM, EWM, LMM and JWM. Motor Vehicle Registration Number KBZ XXXP Toyota Fielder 51. The 2nd Petitioner proposes that this motor vehicle remain with DWM, it having been used as the family vehicle for the deceased's transport during his lifetime and remaining in her possession and use to date. The 1st Petitioner proposes sale and equal sharing of proceeds. The court prefers the position https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 21

page 21 of 25

of the 2nd Petitioner. The evidence is uncontroverted that this vehicle has been in the continuous possession and use of DWM since the deceased's death, serving as the household transport for the Second House. Ordering its sale would cause unnecessary disruption to her household. Furthermore, as the surviving widow, DWM is entitled under Section 35(1)(a) of the Law of Succession Act to the personal and household effects of the deceased absolutely, and a motor vehicle used for family transport falls squarely within that category. Motor Vehicle Registration Number KBZ XXXP Toyota Fielder shall accordingly vest absolutely in DWM and shall remain with her. Racecourse Neighbours Group Shares 52. Both parties agree that the Racecourse Neighbours Group shares should be equally shared between the two families. The court accordingly orders these shares to be transferred proportionately in the ratio of 9/14 to the First House and 5/14 to the Second House, each house distributing its allocation equally among its members. If the shares are not transferable in fractional portions, they shall be liquidated and the proceeds distributed in the same proportions. 53. Accordingly, the residual estate shall be distributed as per the table hereunder: - https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 22

page 22 of 25

Name Description of Property Share of Heirs (Deceased MM's Children) SMM JKM SWN Pioneer/Ngeria 1(EATEC)7XXX House No 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM Eldoret Langas Plot Equally JKM Motor Vehicle Reg No. KAW XXXK G. Touring Whole House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Shares At Standard Bank, KCB AND Ken-Gen To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries of the Estate House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Money at Barclays Bank and ABSA To be shared equally after all liabilities have been paid (net Sum) DWM Eldoret Municipality Block 4/ XX Whole EKM Eldoret Pioneer/Langas Block X (Malel)/XXX Whole JKM Eldoret Municipality Block 15/XXX (Mwenderi) Whole Estate of the late MMM to devolve equally to her three children; SMM JKM SWN Eldoret Plot Outspan Equally House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM (deceased) JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM [Particulars Withheld] School Plot Equally House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Soy Plot Equally Block https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 Whole 23

page 23 of 25

54. House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM Nakuru Miti Mingi/mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) Equally House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Nakuru Miti Mingi/Mbaruk Block 9/XXX (Ndiuni) Equally House No 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Nakuru Mwareki Plot Equally House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Kiambaa Farm (mudavadi Farm / Ngeria/Kabogo Block X Kiamba/XXX) Equally DWM Motor Vehicle Registration Number KBZ XXXP Toyota Fielder Whole House 1 JMM AWK Estate of MMM JKM AWM VNM EKM SNM PWM House 2 DWM JMM EWM LMM JWM Racecourse Group Shares To be sold and proceeds to be shared equally among all the beneficiaries of the Estate Neighbours In the end, the following orders do abide: a. That the grant of letters of administration intestate in the Estate of the late SMN issued on 10th February 2023 is hereby confirmed. b. That the estate of the late SMN shall be distributed in accordance with the distribution matrix set out above and a Certificate of Confirmation of Grant shall be generated forthwith. c. That the Administrators of the intestate estate of the deceased are hereby placed on notice and are directed to expeditiously and diligently complete the administration of the estate including the transmission and distribution of all the estate assets to the respective beneficiaries strictly in accordance with the Law of Succession Act. d. That the Administrators shall, within sixty (60) days from the date hereof, take all necessary statutory and administrative steps to effect transmission of the estate properties to the respective beneficiaries as confirmed by this Court, including execution of all relevant transfer instruments and compliance with the requirements of the law. e. That the Administrators shall file a Probate Account with 90 days from the date of this Ruling herein. f. That there shall be no orders as to the costs. Orders accordingly. https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 24

page 24 of 25

DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIA CTS AT ELDORET THIS 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2026 ………………………………………… R. NYAKUNDI JUDGE https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/3340/eng@2026-03-13 25

page 25 of 25