Please Wait. Searching ...
|Case Number:||Succession Cause 350 of 1998|
|Parties:||In re Estate of Pius Magero Gumo (Deceased)|
|Date Delivered:||06 Oct 2021|
|Court:||High Court at Kitale|
|Judge(s):||Luka Kiprotich Kimaru|
|Citation:||In re Estate of Pius Magero Gumo (Deceased)  eKLR|
|Case Outcome:||Application ordered|
|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 KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE
SUCCESSION CAUUSE NO. 350 OF 1998
IN THE ESTATE OF PIUS MAGERO GUMO – DECEASED
ANNA ADHIAMBO GUMO
MARY CATHERINE ODUOL GUMO
EMELDA APIYO IMANDA
MARGARET SIKUKUU GUMO......................................1ST PETITIONER
OLIVER MAGERO GUMO..............................................2ND PETITIONER
This is a protracted Succession dispute - at least for now there appears to be light at the end of the tunnel. Applicants, who are the daughters of the deceased, have applied to this court for the following order:
“THAT this Honorable Court hereby distributes the commercial assets listed below by liquidating them and the proceeds be shared equally among the beneficiaries.
a) LR No. 12138/7 Nairobi
b) LR No. 209/1498/12 Nairobi
c) LR No. 2116/30/10 Kitale Municipality
d) LR No. 2116/20/10 Kitale Municipality
e) LR No. 2116/7/IV Kitale Municipality
f) Share certificate for 2196 shares A/C No. 002xxxxx
g) Share certificate for 300 shares, Barclays Bank (K) Ltd.
h) Share certificate for 1,155 shares Standard Chartered Bank A/C No. 008xxx.”
The application is supported by the annexed affidavit of Catherine Oduol Gumo. The application was not opposed by the majority of the beneficiaries. However, Charles Gumo swore an affidavit in opposition to the Application.
The plain reading of the application, the supporting affidavit and the replying affidavit clearly shows that there are some of the beneficiaries who are enjoying the status quo by collecting rents from the said properties. There is no evidence that upon collection of the said rent, the same has been distributed to all he beneficiaries. The administration of the estate of deceased’s persons must inevitably come to an end. The beneficiaries cannot be joined in the hip by being tied to an undistributed property of the deceased in perpetuity; at some point all the properties of the deceased must be distributed to the beneficiaries irrespective of the wishes of some of the beneficiaries who wish to maintain the status quo.
In the present case, it was evident to this court that the time to wind up this estate has arrived. Part of the winding up process is to distribute the remaining assets that comprise the undistributed estate of the deceased to the beneficiaries. It is in light of the foregoing observation that this court agrees with the Applicants that the undistributed properties must be sold and thereafter the proceeds therefrom be distributed equally among all the beneficiaries.
To achieve this objective, this court issues the following orders:
i) The said properties shall each be valued by a valuer to be agreed by the parties to this application. The cost of valuation shall be borne equally by the parties to the application.
ii) After the valuation, the valuation report shall be submitted to court. The court shall ascertain the value after which any interested beneficiary shall have the first option to purchase the property. The purchase consideration realized from such sale shall be deposited in an escrow account to be maintained by the Advocates of the parties to this application.
iii) If none of the beneficiaries shall be able to pay the ascertained purchase consideration, the remainder of the properties shall be advertised for sale and the same shall be sold in a public auction subject to the reserve price which shall be the ascertained value of the particular property.
iv) The valuation exercise shall be undertaken and reports submitted to court within 45 days of today’s date.
v) Since this is a family dispute, there shall be no order as to costs.
DATED AT KITALE THIS 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021.