AI Legal Chatbot
Documents
Cases
Laws
Law Firms
LPMS
Quizzes
Login
Join
In re Estate of Lomulen Akehem Karamoe [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Court
High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
Category
Civil
Judge(s)
Hon. H. A. Omondi
Judgment Date
May 05, 2020
Country
Kenya
Document Type
PDF
Number of Pages
3
Case Summary
Full Judgment
Explore the key highlights of the In re Estate of Lomulen Akehem Karamoe [2020] eKLR case, analyzing its impact on estate law and legal principles.
Case Brief: In re Estate of Lomulen Akehem Karamoe [2020] eKLR
1. Case Information:
- Name of the Case: In the Matter of the Estate of Lomulen Akehem Karamo
- Case Number: Succession Cause No. 139 of 2005
- Court: High Court of Kenya at Eldoret
- Date Delivered: May 5, 2020
- Category of Law: Civil
- Judge(s): Hon. H. A. Omondi
- Country: Kenya
2. Questions Presented:
The central legal issue in this case is whether the grant of letters of administration intestate issued to the petitioner, Amekoi Ekatapan Edung, should be revoked based on claims of fraudulent acquisition and the legitimacy of the petitioner’s marital status with the deceased, Lomulen Akehem Karamo.
3. Facts of the Case:
The petitioner, Amekoi Ekatapan Edung, applied for letters of administration intestate following the death of her husband, Lomulen Akehem Karamo, on January 12, 2001. The objectors—Thomas Kiprop Kimitei, Rhoda Akai Arbach, Peter Nakete, David Ekalebon Ereng, and Ameri Keem—contested the grant, claiming that it was obtained fraudulently by misrepresenting the petitioner’s relationship with the deceased. They argued that they had purchased land from the deceased and were in possession of it, asserting that the petitioner was not his lawful widow and that her children were not his.
4. Procedural History:
Following the petitioner's application for letters of administration, the objectors filed a summons for revocation of the grant on April 20, 2006. The court proceeded to hear testimonies from both parties, with the objectors presenting evidence that contradicted the petitioner’s claims of marriage to the deceased. The court examined the evidence and the legitimacy of the petitioner’s marital status before delivering its ruling.
5. Analysis:
- Rules: The court considered
Section 76 of the Law of Succession Act
, which allows for the revocation of a grant if it was obtained fraudulently or through false statements. The court also referenced customary law regarding marriage, which requires evidence to establish a valid marriage.
- Case Law: The court cited *Kimani v. Gikanga (1965) EA 735*, which emphasizes the need for clear evidence to establish customary marriage, and *Gituanja v. Gituanja (1983) KLR*, which held that the existence of a customary marriage is a matter of fact that must be proven with evidence.
- Application: The court found that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate her claim of being married to the deceased. Witness testimonies from the objectors and other parties indicated that the deceased had never been married and that the petitioner’s claims were unfounded. Therefore, the court ruled that the grant was obtained through untrue allegations.
6. Conclusion:
The court ruled to revoke the grant of letters of administration issued to the petitioner, Amekoi Ekatapan Edung, based on the determination that she was not legally married to the deceased. The court emphasized the importance of substantiating claims of marriage in succession cases, particularly under customary law. The decision underscores the need for accurate representations in matters of estate administration.
7. Dissent:
There were no dissenting opinions noted in the case ruling.
8. Summary:
The High Court of Kenya ruled to revoke the grant of letters of administration intestate previously issued to Amekoi Ekatapan Edung due to fraudulent claims regarding her marital status with the deceased, Lomulen Akehem Karamo. This case highlights the critical importance of providing credible evidence in succession matters and clarifies the legal standards for establishing customary marriages in Kenya.
Document Summary
Below is the summary preview of this document.
This is the end of the summary preview.
📢 Share this document with your network
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Related Documents
Bebadis Company Limited & 2 others v Sylvia Wamboi Karanja & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Hitesh Bikhula Khetia v Fatuma Jama Mohamed [2020] eKLR Case Summary
In re Estate of John Mwaura Ndungu (Deceased) [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Chebut Tea Factory Limited v Flomena Jemutai [2020] eKLR Case Summary
National Transport and Safety Authority & 2 others v Elisha Zebedee Ongoya [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Bakehouse Investment Ltd v Bake N Bite (Nairobi) Ltd & another; Antonio Lionetti (Objector/Applicant) [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Charles Steven Mbindyo v Justus Wainaina Njuguna & 2 others [2020] eKR Case Summary
William Ouko Ogola v Florence Murunga Okea & 3 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Charles Oloo Omengo v Boderless Tracking Limited [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Jackson Mwabili v Peterson Mateli [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Salimu Iddi Mwamguta v Joseph Omondo & another [2020] eKLR Case Summary
In re Estate of Benjamin Kipyego Arap Mutai (Deceased) [2020] eKLR Case Summary
Kihara Mercy Wairimu & 7 others v Kenya School of Law & 4 others [2020] eKLR Case Summary
View all summaries
 
Ask Sheriaplex AI about this Case
Ask AI
Ask AI about this Judgment
×
đź‘‹ Hi! Ask me anything about this judgment.