Wives in fierce court battle over where to bury late husband

The hearing of the matter is scheduled for Wednesday, February 28.

In Summary
  • This is following a tussle between his two wives Grace Rigiri and Sarah Kathambi on where their late husband Silas Igweta is to be laid to final rest.
  • This led Rigiri, the first wife, to move to Milimani Courts where she sought orders temporarily stopping the removal of Igweta's body from Umash's funeral home.
Lawyer Danstan Omari with the family of Sara Kathambi at Milimani Law Courts on February 26, 2024.
Lawyer Danstan Omari with the family of Sara Kathambi at Milimani Law Courts on February 26, 2024.
Image: DOUGLAS OKIDDY

Two families are embroiled in a row over where a 100-year-old man should be buried.

This is following a tussle between his two wives Grace Rigiri and Sarah Kathambi on where their late husband Silas Igweta is to be laid to final rest.

This led Rigiri, the first wife, to move to Milimani Courts where she sought orders temporarily stopping the removal of Igweta's body from Umash's funeral home.

On February 22, the Commercial Court issued orders temporarily stopping the burial.

In an affidavit, Rigiri said she got married to Igweta on July 27, 1959, and she was subsequently issued a marriage certificate and that she lived with him as husband and wife until his demise on February 17.

Rigiri told the court that she and her son would be prejudiced if the court did not grant the orders sought.

She said that she and her children would suffer untold and extreme mental, physical and emotional trauma, anguish and insurmountable social embarrassment.

Challenging the application, Kathambi claimed that her late husband and Rigiri have lived separately for more than 40 years.

She alleged that Igweta introduced her as his second wife to the parents and had paid for the dowry according to the Meru customary law.

Through her lawyer Danstan Omari, she argued that they used over Sh5 million for the deceased's medical bills and maintenance while the Rigiri neglected him in his old age.

"It is strange that the first family claim to have had a close proximity with the deceased, yet they never catered for his needs including but not limited to medical bills which burdened the deceased’s second family alone," the court documents.

The hearing of the matter is scheduled for Wednesday, February 28.

WATCH: The latest videos from the Star