Case Metadata |
|
| Case Number: | Succession Cause 126 of 2003 |
|---|---|
| Parties: | Julius Kisabuli Maunda & Ben Khamala Maunda v Stanley Misigo Maunda |
| Date Delivered: | 05 Dec 2016 |
| Case Class: | Civil |
| Court: | High Court at Kitale |
| Case Action: | Ruling |
| Judge(s): | Hilary Kiplagat Chemitei |
| Citation: | Julius Kisabuli Maunda & another v Stanley Misigo Maunda [2016] eKLR |
| Advocates: | Chebii for the Objector |
| Court Division: | Family |
| County: | Trans Nzoia |
| Advocates: | Chebii for the Objector |
| History Advocates: | One party or some parties represented |
| Case Outcome: | grant issued on 26/1/2004 and confirmed on 13/11/2008 was set aside |
| Disclaimer: | The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information |
REPUBLIC OF KEANYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA
AT KITALE
SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 126 OF 2003
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF KEFA MAUNDA KIBUNGUCHI.......DECEASED
JULIUS KISABULI MAUNDA............................................APPLICANTS/OBJECTORS
BEN KHAMALA MAUNDA....................................................APPLICANT/OBJECTORS
VERSUS
STANLEY MISIGO MAUNDA.................................................RESPONENT/PETITIONER
RULING
This is an application by the respondent dated 29/6/2016 for the following orders;
1) There be stay of prosecution of Bungoma ELC No. 225 of 2014 pending the hearing and determination of this summons.
2) The grant issued on 26/1/2004 and confirmed on 13/11/2008 be revoked.
Basically all the applicants are saying in their replying affidavit sworn on 29/6/2016 is that they were not involved in the earlier exercise and that the signatures on record are forgeries. They further aver that there are other purchasers of the suit property who are being harassed by the respondent through filing of
suit No. Bungoma ELC No. 225 of 2014 and yet they are recognised as purchasers for value of the land.
The respondent did not file any document to contest the application. All the parties herein are related, namely the sons of the deceased. Section 76 of the Succession Act provides that in such a situation where the applicant failed to disclose material facts or acted without the consent of the others this court is entitled to act through such an application or suo moto.
In the absence of any response by the respondent I take it that all that the applicants stated are true. They were not involved in the entire exercise of succeeding the deceased estate.
In the premises the grant issued on 26/1/2004 and confirmed on 13/11/2008 is hereby set aside with all the attendant consequences.
Costs in the cause.
Delivered this 5th day of December 2016.
________________
H.K. CHEMITEI
JUDGE
In presence of ;
Chebii for the Objector
No appearance for the Respondent
Kirong – Court Assistant
Please Wait. Searching ...