In re Estate of Tingo Arap Yego (Deceased, also known as Tingo Ngelo Yego) [2020] KEHC 3581 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA

AT ELDORET

SUCCESSION CAUSE NO. 296 OF 2001

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF TINGO ARAP YEGO (DECEASED, ALSO KNOWN AS TINGO NGELO YEGO)

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF ADMINISTRATORS

BETWEEN

JOHN TINGO........................................1ST PETITIONER

DAVID KIPROTICH MURGOR........2ND PETITIONER

AND

PHILISTA J. CHUMO.............................1ST OBJECTOR

EMILIANA YEGO...................................2ND OBJECTOR

RULING

[1]This ruling is in respect of the application dated 10 February 2020. It was filed herein by the Objectors, Philista J. Chumo and Emiliana Yego, pursuant to Sections 45 and 46 of the Law of Succession Act, for orders that:

[a]  spent

[b] The Administrators, namely, John Tingo and David Kiprotich Murgor, be summoned to attend Court to show cause why they are not ready and/or willing to effect transmission of the estate to the beneficiaries.

[c] In default of [b] above, the Administrators be removed from being the Administrators of the estate and that they be substituted by the Felister Chumo, Carlina Tongoi Sang and Milka Jelagat Chumo in order to complete the distribution of the estate.

[d]  Any other order that the Court may deem fit to grant.

[2] The application was premised on the grounds that the deceased died intestate on 19 July 2001 and that his estate has remained under administration to date in spite of pleas by the beneficiaries that they be given their respective shares. The application is supported by the affidavit annexed thereto, wherein it was averred that this dispute has been pending before court since the year 2001; and that it was not until 18 October 2019 that it was settled via mediation and a Certificate of Confirmation issued. That since then, the Administrators have resumed their indolence and declined to finalize the process of transmission as required of them. It was on that account that the instant application was filed.

[3] The Administrators were duly served with the application; and, whereas the 1st Administrator attended court, he was unable to give any justification for their indolence, except that they are not happy with the Mediation Settlement. The 2nd Administrator did not attend court and no explanation was given for that failure. Thus, the matter proceeded ex parte on 3 March 2020. While acknowledging that this Succession Cause has been pending for long, the 1st Administrator completely failed to give any plausible justification for the state of affairs.

[4]  I have nevertheless perused the record and noted that the deceased made a Will and set out his wishes therein as to how he wanted his estate handled. The provisions pursuant to which the application has been brought do not provide for the reliefs sought. And, as this is not an application for revocation of Grant, I take the view that no sufficient cause has been shown for the removal of the Administrators. There is no proof that they have intermeddled with the estate for purposes of Section 45 of the Law of Succession Act. It is manifest therefore that the application is incompetent and is hereby struck out. It is further ordered that immediate steps be taken by the executors to conclude this longstanding matter.

It is so ordered.

DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED AT ELDORET THIS 12TH DAY OF MAY, 2020.

OLGA SEWE

JUDGE