1. Vide an originating summons dated 16th May 2025, the applicants seek to have this court order that the deceased property under Wakf 3087 be subdivided “according to the Wakf of the deceased,” that the property be subdivided equally between the two families and that the applicant be allowed to administer the estate of her deceased husband in lieu of the Respondents.
2. The applicants contend that they are the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Omar Kombo Bwanakombo Hassan. The deceased died, leaving his property No CR 3087 under a Wakf. They state that the property was under the respondents' control, that the respondents had leased or developed part of it, and that they were not paying rates.
3. The originating summons is opposed by the respondents. The respondents filed a replying affidavit sworn by Hassan Kad Omar on 2nd October, 2025, in which they denied that the applicants had the standing to bring the application. They thus prayed that the originating summons be struck out with costs.
4. The respondents further averred that the matter was res judicata as there is a consent recorded in 2014. Regarding the alleged developments, it was contended that the impugned lease was entered into with the consent of Bakari Kombo, who signed it.
5. The originating summons was canvassed by way of written submissions. The applicants' submissions are dated 26th January 2026. In the said submissions, it was urged that the applicants had been living in the suit property peacefully until a conflict arose. Counsel for the applicants stated that the respondents alleged that they are the only administrators of the estate of Omar Hassan Kombo. It was urged that the applicants are the beneficiaries of the estate through their late father.
6. The applicants thus urged that the property under Wakf be subdivided equally among the beneficiaries to maintain peace in the family. They also prayed for an order of injunction.
7. On their part, the respondent’s counsel filed written submissions dated 11th December 2025, in which they prayed for the dismissal of the originating summons dated 16th May 2025 for being an abuse of the process of the court.
8. In the said submissions, it was urged that the originating summons was defective for want of authority to plead as required by Order 1 Rule 13 (1) (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
9. Counsel for the Respondent deprecated the fact that the applicants did not attach evidence showing that plot No. CR 3087 was owned by the late Bwana Kombo and was a Wakf property. Questions regarding Hassan Kad Omar's standing were raised.
10. It was urged that the matter was determined vide a consent entered into on 17th September 2014 in HCA No.17 of 2014 whereby the Wakf of the Estate of Bwana Kombo was reinstated.
11. The Respondents thus prayed that the Originating Summons be dismissed with costs.
12. I have considered the originating summons dated 16th May 2025. Although it has been stated that CR No 3087 belongs to the deceased and was under a Wakf, no copy of the title, nor a search thereof, nor a Wakf deed has been provided. Without evidence, this court is unable to determine whether the property is subject to a Wakf.
13. The applicants urge that they are beneficiaries of the estate of Bwana Kombo Omar. Unfortunately, they have not provided a copy of the grant of representation that empowers them to represent the said estate; without the grant, they cannot purport to represent their father’s estate. That being the case, they do not have the locus to file the originating summons.
14. In the circumstances, the originating summons dated 16th May 2025 is dismissed. Given the nature of the matter, parties will bear their own costs.
15. It is so ordered.
Dated and signed at Nairobi, this 15th day of June 2026.
2. The applicants contend that they are the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Omar Kombo Bwanakombo Hassan. The deceased died, leaving his property No CR 3087 under a Wakf. They state that the property was under the respondents' control, that the respondents had leased or developed part of it, and that they were not paying rates.
3. The originating summons is opposed by the respondents. The respondents filed a replying affidavit sworn by Hassan Kad Omar on 2nd October, 2025, in which they denied that the applicants had the standing to bring the application. They thus prayed that the originating summons be struck out with costs.
4. The respondents further averred that the matter was res judicata as there is a consent recorded in 2014. Regarding the alleged developments, it was contended that the impugned lease was entered into with the consent of Bakari Kombo, who signed it.
5. The originating summons was canvassed by way of written submissions. The applicants' submissions are dated 26th January 2026. In the said submissions, it was urged that the applicants had been living in the suit property peacefully until a conflict arose. Counsel for the applicants stated that the respondents alleged that they are the only administrators of the estate of Omar Hassan Kombo. It was urged that the applicants are the beneficiaries of the estate through their late father.
6. The applicants thus urged that the property under Wakf be subdivided equally among the beneficiaries to maintain peace in the family. They also prayed for an order of injunction.
7. On their part, the respondent’s counsel filed written submissions dated 11th December 2025, in which they prayed for the dismissal of the originating summons dated 16th May 2025 for being an abuse of the process of the court.
8. In the said submissions, it was urged that the originating summons was defective for want of authority to plead as required by Order 1 Rule 13 (1) (2) of the Civil Procedure Rules.
9. Counsel for the Respondent deprecated the fact that the applicants did not attach evidence showing that plot No. CR 3087 was owned by the late Bwana Kombo and was a Wakf property. Questions regarding Hassan Kad Omar's standing were raised.
10. It was urged that the matter was determined vide a consent entered into on 17th September 2014 in HCA No.17 of 2014 whereby the Wakf of the Estate of Bwana Kombo was reinstated.
11. The Respondents thus prayed that the Originating Summons be dismissed with costs.
12. I have considered the originating summons dated 16th May 2025. Although it has been stated that CR No 3087 belongs to the deceased and was under a Wakf, no copy of the title, nor a search thereof, nor a Wakf deed has been provided. Without evidence, this court is unable to determine whether the property is subject to a Wakf.
13. The applicants urge that they are beneficiaries of the estate of Bwana Kombo Omar. Unfortunately, they have not provided a copy of the grant of representation that empowers them to represent the said estate; without the grant, they cannot purport to represent their father’s estate. That being the case, they do not have the locus to file the originating summons.
14. In the circumstances, the originating summons dated 16th May 2025 is dismissed. Given the nature of the matter, parties will bear their own costs.
15. It is so ordered.
Dated and signed at Nairobi, this 15th day of June 2026.