SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Charles Kyathe Ndeke v Dancan Mutunga & 2 others [2015] KEHC 1759 (KLR)

[2015] KEHC 1759 (KLR) High Court of Kenya
Read PDF
Court
High Court of Kenya
Case number
1759
Citation
[2015] KEHC 1759 (KLR)
Decided
22 October 2015
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeSuccessionPostureApplication for preservation of estateCoramP. NYAMWEYA
Holding

The court ordered the 1st Respondent to stop intermeddling with the estate of the deceased and restrained him from cultivating the land.

Facts

The deceased, Kimeu Ndeke Kavwii, passed away. The Applicant, Charles Kyathe Ndeke, sought letters of administration and preservation of the estate. The 1st Respondent, Dancan Mutunga, was accused of intermeddling with the estate by visiting the land to fix boundaries and cultivating it.

Issues

  1. Whether the orders for preservation of the estate are available to the Applicant.
  2. Whether the 1st Respondent's actions are in accordance with the Law of Succession Act.

Reasoning

The court noted that section 45 of the Law of Succession Act prohibits any person from taking possession or disposing of, or otherwise intermeddling with, any free property of a deceased person, except in instances expressly authorized by the Act.

Outcome

The court granted the application for preservation of the estate.

Orders

  • That the 1st Respondent be stopped from intermeddling with the estate of the deceased by visiting the land to fix boundaries and or altering boundaries whilst the cause is pending in this court, and or before letters of administration are issued to the petitioner.
  • That Duncan Mutunga be restrained from cultivating the land, cutting down trees, erecting structures on the land and claiming to have bought the land from a person who is not related to the family.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Law of Succession Act
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.1 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case