Cheporoko Riomongar, Loriono Riomongar & Domitila Chepokosumoi Daniel v Jacob Kuchulem Riomongor & Monica Chepengat Kuchulem [2016] KEHC 5792 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE

SUCCESSION CAUUSE NO. 40 OF 2013

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF RIOMONGOR

KUCHULEM........................................DECEASED

CHEPOROKO RIOMONGAR..........................1ST APPLICANT

LORIONO RIOMONGAR..............................2ND APPLICANT

DOMITILA CHEPOKOSUMOI DANIEL............3RD APPLICANT

AND

JACOB KUCHULEM RIOMONGOR..............1ST RESPONDENT

MONICA CHEPENGAT KUCHULEM …............2ND RESPONDENT

R U L I N G

The application dated 10/6/2015  principally seeks orders that the  grant of letters of administration issued to the Respondent herein on the 27/5/2013 and confirmed on the 20/3/2014, over the estate of the late RIOMONGAR KUCHULEM, and who died on the 23/3/1990 be revoked and or annulled.

Secondly, that upon the revocation and or annulment of the grant of letters of administration issued to the Respondents on the 27/5/2013 and confirmed on the 20/3/2014, an order be made that the land comprised in Title Nos. WEST POKOT/CHEPARERIA/2298, 2299, 22300and 22301 do revert to Title No WEST POKOT/CHEPARERIA/379 in the name of the late RIOMONGAR KUCHULEM.

The 1st applicant is a widow to the deceased while the 2nd  and 3rd applicants are her children with the  deceased.  It is stated that the 2nd widow of the deceased is CHEPTAR RIOMONGAR.  That the other two widows of the deceased have  since passed on.  That prior to his death, the deceased  had shared out his land among his four houses.  The applicants' complaint is  that   they were not aware of this succession cause.  That some of the  land  parcels  which form part of  the estate of the deceased  were not  disclosed to the court.

The application is  opposed. According to the replying affidavit,  the deceased shared out his land amongst his four houses.  It is  contended that  all the beneficiaries were notified of the petition herein but no objection was lodged  and  that there was no concealment of any material facts.

During the hearing of the application, the  parties  opted to proceed by way of written submissions.  Subsequently the applicants filed theirs but the Respondents stated that they would not file any.  I have considered the  filed submissions.

I have scrutinized the consent to the making of a grant of  Administration  Intestate  to a person of equal or lesser priority (form 38) which was  filed herein.  The applicants names are missing from the said consent.

The applicants names are also missing from the consent to the confirmation of the grant.

The proceedings to obtain the grant were therefore defective in substance  due to  the concealment of material facts.  The application is allowed with costs to the applicants.

B. THURANIRA JADEN

JUDGE

Delivered and dated this 23rd day of march 2016.

B. THURANIRA JADEN

JUDGE