The Church of Almighty God Malaki Ltd v Administrator General and Others (Miscellaneous Application No. 92 of 2009)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
Held that the application for a vesting order was fatally defective and misconceived. An affidavit not dated by the Commissioner for Oaths offends the Oaths Act and cannot stand in law. Service of court process outside the 21-day period prescribed by Order 5 rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Rules, without a prior application for extension of time, offends the law. Applications for vesting orders on grounds of possession and acquiescence under the Registration of Titles Act must be brought before the Chief Registrar of Titles, not the High Court. The Administrator General, having no grant of probate or letters of administration to the deceased's estate, was wrongly sued. A bequest for charitable purposes by a testator with relatives is void under Section 105 of the Succession Act where the will was not deposited in the prescribed place within six months of execution. Application dismissed with costs.
Outcome
Application dismissed on five preliminary objections; no substantive hearing
Facts
The applicant church claimed a donation of 10 acres from the late Yose Kato made in 1970 on land comprised in Bulemezi Block 399 plot 12. The deceased died in 1976. The applicant alleged possession since 1976 acquiesced by the deceased's family and the Administrator General, whose office opened an estate file in 1993. The applicant sought a vesting order directing the Commissioner Land Registration to transfer the land into its name, citing the deceased donor's death and the Administrator General's alleged failure to effect the transfer. The respondents did not file affidavits in reply. At the hearing, counsel for the Administrator General raised five preliminary objections on points of law.
Issues
- Whether the affidavit in support of the application is valid when not dated.
- Whether service of the application was effected within the time prescribed by law.
- Whether the application for a vesting order was brought before the correct forum.
- Whether the Administrator General is the proper party to an application concerning a private estate.
- Whether a bequest for charitable purposes made by a testator with relatives is valid when not deposited as required by law.
Orders
- Application dismissed.
- Costs awarded to the respondents.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (11)
- Registration of Titles Act cap 230 s.188
- Registration of Titles Act cap 230 s.78
- Registration of Titles Act cap 230 s.167
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 52 rules 1 and 3
- Civil Procedure Rules Order 5 rules 1(b), 2 and 3
- Civil Procedure Act cap 71 s.98
- Civil Procedure Act cap 71 s.2
- Oaths Act cap 19 s.6
- Commissioner for Oaths (Advocates) Act cap 5 s.5
- Succession Act cap 162 s.105
- Succession Act cap 162 s.337
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.