Samuel Wainaina Kamau & 1 other v Mary Wanjiru Mwangi

The Court re-evaluated the whole record as a first appellate court. It found support in the respondent's long settled occupation of about 3.26 acres, the agricultural officer's evidence that the land was demarcated into two shares before tea planting on both brothers' instructions, the 2002 caution asserting beneficial interest, the appellants' own acknowledgment of trust-like family arrangements, and the pattern of occupation shown in the survey material. Indefeasibility of the 1958 registration was not conclusive because statute preserves trusts as overriding interests.

The Court held that admission of a document does not dispense with evaluation of its probative value, but the trial court was entitled to weigh the documents alongside viva voce evidence. Quashed tribunal decisions cannot operate as binding adjudications, but their records may be received as evidence of historical facts subject to relevance and weight, particularly where witnesses are no longer available. The tribunal materials were not dispositive of the appeal.

A probate court's mandate is administration and distribution of estates and it does not determine contested questions of title or trust. Where the complaint is that an allocation in the succession process does not reflect a beneficial entitlement under a customary trust, adjudication belongs to the Environment and Land Court under Article 162(2)(b). The entitlement under a trust precedes the grant and defines what forms part of the free property available for distribution.