- Malingumu used every trick in the book to ensure his sisters were excluded from father's property
- He named nine people to have survived his father, none of them his siblings
Image: FILE
A man in Kakamega who tried to disinherit his three sisters has lost the legal right to distribute his father's estate.
The High Court in Kakamega revoked the powers of Francis Munialo Malingumu as administrator after it emerged he only named ‘strangers’ as beneficiaries.
Justice William Musyoka said Malingumu ruled that Malingumu, named the administrator of Joseph Koyabe Muktenyo’s property, could not be trusted as he had tried every trick to disinherit his sisters.
“It is unfortunate the extent to which a human being can go in order to acquire wealth, including disowning their blood siblings and embracing total strangers,” the judge said.
“It would appear to me that Malingumu is using every trick in the book to ensure that his sisters are excluded from benefit, so that the entire estate is left to him”.
Malingumu named nine people to have survived Muktenyo, none of them his siblings, in his application seeking confirmation of grant of the property. He claimed his three sisters had disappeared and could not be traced. He is Muktenyo’s only son.
He attached a letter from the chief of Mautuma location, dated July 2, 2018, which explained why his sisters Jane Khatunyi, Agnet Machuma and Night Nangunda had not been allocated shares of the estate.
Khatunyi allegedly disappeared from home and thereafter got married in Tanzania. Machuma and Nangunda were alleged to have gone underground after being involved in a murder sometime in 2016 and their whereabouts cannot be traced.
“In any case, they had been given their share of the land, which they sold to a Fred Munga Uwembe, and it was on that basis that they have not be allocated anything in the proposed distribution,” reads part of the letter.
Malingumu proposed that the property be shared out unevenly between Nancy Kangethe, Sammy Dapash, Fred Luvembe, Wycliffe Mbogo, Elizabeth Ndiwa, Charles Mbali, Joseph Simiyu and Roseline Wabwire.
The judge in a detailed ruling affirmed that unknown whereabouts does not extinguish the right of a child to a share in the estate of their dead parent.
He said the law makes no distinction between male and female children or between married and unmarried children.
“They are all treated equally. The law is gender neutral,” he said. “The fact that a daughter of the deceased has married and now stays abroad is not a disqualifying factor to inheritance”.
Musyoka ruled that the mere fact that a child of a deceased person has engaged in criminal conduct does not take away that child’s rights.
“A criminal, even a seasoned one, would still be entitled to a share in their parent’s estate equally with the other children, whether he or she is in jail or not,” said the judge.
“The law makes only one exception, where the crime is the murder of the parent to whose estate they seek a share,” he added.
Justice Musyoka however poked holes in how casually the murder allegation had been brought forward despite the claim being a capital offence.
“I note that no details have been given. When or in which year is it that they were involved in a murder? Where was this? Who was murdered? What was their role? Were they charged in court? Details around those questions would be critical in assessing the credibility of the allegation,” he said.
Details of Malingumu’s failed attempts to previously disinherit his sisters also emerged when a man, Joseph Khaemba Njakusi, sought to delay the confirmation proceedings, on account of his ex-wife, Wabwire, being included in the list of beneficiaries.
He said is that he had bought 1.15 acres of land from the deceased before he died but that the sale agreement disappeared from his house, which he blamed Wabwire for.
Njakusi claimed that Malingumu and his ex-wife colluded, that the loss of his documents relating to the transactions from his house had something to do Wabwire after their marriage ran into headwinds. .
“The administrator appears to have attempted to have land herein transferred in 2017 to the same people, who he had listed as liabilities then. He only filed for this after he failed to achieve that objective,” the judge noted.
Musyoka said he was not persuaded that all the assets of the estate were presented for distribution as there were documents on record that in 1984 the deceased had acquired two assets, which remained undisclosed.
“I do not believe that Malingumu is a trustworthy person to warrant his continuing to hold the office of administrator,” he ruled.
“The picture that emerges so far is untidy. The administrator has not fully disclosed the assets of the deceased, has sought to dispose of some before confirmation of grant and he has sought to disinherit his sisters and to unjustly enrich strangers,” he said.
“Another administrator ought to be appointed who is neutral to complete administration or until the daughters are traced and brought on board. I am considering the public trustee, who is the administrator of last resort.”