1.The application dated 30th April, 2021 is for revocation of the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 10th March, 2021 on the basis of the grounds contained in the summons for revocation of grant as supported by the affidavit deponed by the applicant, Rodgers Ombale Magina, on the 30th April, 2021.The Petitioner, Henry Egesa Wanzala, opposed the application vide the replying affidavit dated 2nd July, 2021.The interested party, ACK Nasira, does not appear to have filed an affidavit in response to the application.Nonetheless, the matter proceeded by way of written submissions and all the parties including the interested party filed their respective submissions which were given due consideration by this Court in the light of the supporting grounds for the application.
2Basically, the parameters for the revocation of a grant or a Certificate of Confirmation of Grant or both are set out in S.76 of the Law of Succession Act which provides that:
3In the Supporting Affidavit, the applicant averred that the Petitioner applied for confirmation of the grant on 5th October, 2007 and he filed a protest thereto. The Court heard the protest and dismissed it. The grant was then confirmed in terms of the application for confirmation. The applicant moved to the Court of Appeal on appeal against ruling of the Court. The appeal was pending at the time the present application was filed.It was also averred by the applicant that the Petitioner wrongly extracted the impugned certificate of Confirmation of Grant thereby going against the court ruling and coming up with new proposals on distribution of the estate.The applicant essentially contends that the Petitioner illegally and fraudulently extracted the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant issued on the basis of his application dated 15th October, 2020 which the applicant had never been served with and which resulted in the omission of his name in the distribution.
4The applicant’s submissions are largely a reiteration and affirmation of the averments contained in his Supporting Affidavit.The Petitioner in opposing the application submitted that the impugned Certificate of Confirmation of Grant was properly drawn and issued. That, the application is a clear abuse of the Court process by the applicant.The interested party submitted that as a Church its interest in the estate property was catered for such that it has no interest in the rest of the estate which the Petitioner and the applicants are disputing about. The interested party therefore left the matter to the Court to resolve the difference between the Petitioner and the Objector.
5The record shows that the impugned Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 10th March, 2021 was regularly issued by the Court after a protracted dispute between the parties in particular the Applicant and the Petitioner on the distribution of the estate which resulted in the ruling of the Court dated the 30th April, 2019 where the proposal of distribution made by the Petitioner was upheld. It was that ruling which informed the impugned certificate of Confirmation of Grant.The applicant/objector was apparently aggrieved by the ruling. He filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal but the indication given herein are that the appeal is pending hearing and determination. It would therefore follow that the present application in as much as it was brought before the finalization of the appeal was clearly an abuse of the Court process and an attempt by the applicant to circumvent the appeal which was preferred by himself and which is expected to deal with the issues that have been raised in this application.
6Although the applicant alleged that the impugned certificate of confirmation was fraudulently obtained and/or extracted he failed to provide sufficient and credible evidence in that regard. In the premises, the applicant failed to satisfy the conditions for revocation and/or annulment of grant as stipulated in S.76 of the Law of Succession Act.In sum, the present application is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the Petitioner.