1. The Applicant filed an application dated 11th September, 2024 asking for orders that the grant issued to the Respondents be revoked. The application is supported by an affidavit sworn by the 1st Applicant of even date.
2. The grounds provided are that the grant was obtained fraudulently due to the non-disclosure of important facts and details regarding the estate. Specifically, it is claimed that the land parcel KISUMU/DAGO/250 is not part of the estate. The 1st applicant stated that this parcel belongs to him, having inherited it from his grandparents.
3. I have read the application, the supporting affidavit and its annexures, and the court record in this matter. The parcel under reference is one of the properties included in the Certificate of Confirmation of Grant dated 8th October, 2013.
4. The 1st Applicant has annexed two green cards, Annex MOO1 dated 27th April, 2011 and MOO2 dated 8th August, 2023.The green cards relate to the same parcel but contain different entries of 28th June, 1994 concerning approval and transfer. Both cards feature the signatures of Land Registrars, certifying them as true copies of the Register. The court cannot determine which of the two entries accurately reflects the situation regarding the parcel in dispute based on the facts presented.
5. The two green cards indicate that the order relating to that entry emanated from Kisumu High Court Civil Suit No. 197 of 1994. The Applicants have not submitted to this Court the relevant proceedings or orders associated with that particular lawsuit. This omission is critical, as the details of those proceedings and orders are essential for evaluating the merits of the application now before the Court.
6. The letter from the Lands Registrar, dated 2nd October, 2023, acknowledges the court order in the case and that the deceased, George Okwach Aboge, had obtained the order. The Registrar has also expressed that he does not know the case’s outcome. This highlights why it was very important for the applicant to present to this court the proceedings and or orders regarding the case as it clearly impacts the parcel’s inclusion in the current probate case. The 1st applicant has indicated that there are additional court proceedings – Kisumu ELC 522 of 2015, whose details in the affidavit are very limited.
7. Revoking a grant is a serious matter with significant implications, and the court must exercise caution when reviewing such applications. This caution is especially important when a significant amount of time has passed since the grant was issued and confirmed, which in this case was in 2013.
8. I must also point out that the application was served via email, and an affidavit of service has been filed. The email used corresponds to a communication from the year 2013 found in the file. I also note that there has been no action on the matter since that year. Furthermore, the Respondents’ counsel has not yet been mapped in the case tracking system. Therefore, I am uncertain whether the service was successfully delivered or if the other parties are aware of the ongoing proceedings.
9. In conclusion, the application dated 11th September, 2024 is not merited and is struck out with no order as to costs.
It is so ordered.
Delivered on 14th November 2024 via the teams platform.
In the presence of;
Court Assistant; Beryl
Mr. Sala Advocate for the Applicants