Mahida v Prajapati (Environment and Land Appeal E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4601 (KLR)
The bottom line
#The High Court confirmed you cannot sue over a deceased person's rent or property in Kenya unless you are the estate's duly appointed administrator.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the preliminary objection raised before the Tribunal was a pure point of law on undisputed facts
- 2.Whether the Rent Restriction Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the dispute
- 3.Whether the appellant had capacity/locus standi to file suit against the respondent in respect of premises belonging to the estate of the late Ranchhodsinh Fulsinh Mahda
Key legal issues
#Validity of the preliminary objection
The objection was a valid, pure point of law predicated on undisputed facts
The court applied the Mukisa Biscuits and Oraro v Mbaja definitions. The questions of jurisdiction and capacity raised before the Tribunal rested on undisputed facts: that the appellant was not the administrator of the deceased's estate and that the succession cause was pending. The objection therefore qualified as a genuine preliminary objection on a point of law.
Jurisdiction of the Rent Restriction Tribunal
The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because no landlord-tenant relationship existed between the parties and the ownership dispute fell to the Environment and Land Court
The Tribunal's jurisdiction under section 5 of the Rent Restriction Act presupposes a landlord-tenant relationship over dwelling houses. Neither party alleged a tenancy agreement with the other, and the appellant's claim was in reality a title/ownership dispute over land, which under Article 162(2)(b) of the Constitution and section 13 of the Environment and Land Court Act belongs to the Environment and Land Court, not the Tribunal.
Capacity/locus standi of the appellant
The appellant, not being the administrator of the deceased's estate, had no locus standi to sue for rent belonging to the estate
Section 82 of the Law of Succession Act vests suit-filing powers in personal representatives. The appellant did not deny that the estate's distribution was pending in Nairobi HC Succession Cause No. 345 of 2020, that tenants were ordered to deposit rent into the deceased's account, and that he lacked authority to access the funds. He therefore had no capacity to claim the rent.
Legal principles established
#- A valid preliminary objection must raise pure points of law on undisputed facts
- A landlord-tenant relationship is created by agreement and cannot be presumed from a change of ownership of the premises
- Only a duly appointed personal representative may sue on behalf of a deceased person's estate
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal was dismissed with costs to the respondent
- 2.It is so ordered
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- On appeal from
- Rent Restriction Tribunal
- Kakamega RRT Case No. E033 of 2023
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Appeal from the Rent Restriction Tribunal (section 8, Rent Restriction Act referenced regarding rights of appeal)
Relief refused
#Setting aside of the Tribunal's ruling of 23rd February 2024 and dismissal of the preliminary objection
The court agreed with the Tribunal's findings on jurisdiction and capacity
Costs of the appeal to the appellant
Costs were awarded to the respondent as the appeal failed
Costs
Appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
In the premises, I find and hold that there is no merit in the appeal before me, which I hereby dismiss with costs to the respondent.
Jurisdiction is everything and before a court or Tribunal embarks on determining a dispute it must first be satisfied that it has the requisite jurisdiction. Where a court or Tribunal finds that it has no jurisdiction it should down its tools.
A landlord-tenant relationship is a relationship created by agreement. There must be consensus between the parties that they have intention to be in such a relationship, but there can be no presumption of such relationship on the basis that the rented premises have changed hands.
Therefore, where a plaintifi files suit in regard to the estate of a deceased person, they must first ensure that they are duly appointed personal representatives of the estate of such deceased person.
Issues in the judgment
#Internal inconsistency in the rent figure claimed: the plaint in the Tribunal sought rent arrears of Kshs. 187,000/- while the recital of the plaint states arrears of Kshs. 153,000/-
The record contains inconsistent monthly rent figures attributed to the respondent (Kshs. 17,000/- and Kshs. 16,000/-)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Mahida v Prajapati (Environment and Land Appeal E009 of 2024) [2025] KEELC 4601 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Kakamega RRT Appeal (Memorandum of Appeal dated 28th February 2024). Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/4601/eng@2025-06-18
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.