Kigo (The Administrator of the Estate of John Nduati Kariuki - Deceased) v Wanjiku (The Administrator of the Estate of John Mburu Kago (Deceased)) & another (Enviromental and Land Originating Summons E057 of 2024) [2026] KEELC 169 (KLR)

4. That the costs of this suit to abide the cause 2. The grounds for the application were laid out in the supporting afidavit sworn by the applicant dated 29th August 2024 where she deponed that the estate she represents entered into partnership with the estate of the John Mburu and Moses Mukuria Muchene the respondents evidenced by attaching the certificate of title. That she came to discover that the respondents were trying to subdivide the partnership into 5 smaller portions Nairobi/block 202/1527, Nairobi/block 202/1528, Nairobi/ block 202/1529, Nairobi/block 202/1530 & Nairobi/block 202/1531 and of which 2 had already been transferred to strangers and leaving out 3 portions in the partner’s names. 3. She deponed that she has tried to have the shares belonging to the estate of John Nduati Kariuki(deceased) transferred to the estate for purposes of administration as but the efiorts have been frustrated by the respondents and hence cannot have the same form part of the estate unless the partnership is dissolved and each partner retains their contribution in the estate as per the certificate of title. 4. The respondents were served but did not enter appearance as evidenced by the afidavit of service sworn by Jacob Mutia dated 23rd July 2025. 5. The hearing of the application was slated on the 29th July 2025 and the respondents having being served did not attend and the matter was set for judgment and the applicant asked to file submissions Applicant’s submissions 6. The applicant submitted that on behalf of the estate of John Nduati Kariuki(deceased) she desired to have the partnership dissolved and have each partner get their contribution of shares to L.R Dagoretti/ waithaka/3 as evidenced by the certificate of title. 7. That the deceased John Nduati Kariuki(deceased) held 73/95 share of the partnership property, Dagoretti/waithaka/32(now Nairobi/block 202/1527, Nairobi/block 202/1528, Nairobi/block 202/1529, Nairobi/block 202/1530 & Nairobi/block 202/1531) and seeks to have the same transferred to her as the administrator of the estate of John Nduati Kariuki(deceased)to hold for and on behalf of the estate. 8. She submitted that the demise of 2 of the Partners c dissolved the partnership and what was needed was for the dividing of the shares held in L.R in Dagoretti/waithaka/32dagoretti/waithaka/32. 9. She relied on Section “37 (1) of the Partnership Act and the case law Sultanali P. Molu & another v Kenya Railways Corporation & another [2002] KEHC 1206 (KLR) 10. The matter is clearly uncontroverted the respondents having failed to enter appearance and file any response. 11. I have gone through at the case law relied on by the applicant that is Sultanali P. Molu & another v Kenya Railways Corporation & another [2002] KEHC 1206 (KLR) and the court stated as follows And in section 46 of the Partnership Act Chapter 29, there is a suggestion that in case of death of a partner, then remaining partner can continue with the business and the estate of the deceased partner will have a share of the profits made. My understanding is that for the purposes of the transactions already started before the partner died, the remaining partner can complete them. In this case, the estate of the deceased 2nd plaintifi has made it clear that it is not interested in the partnership business any more. There was a property which is the subject of this suit. I do not see how the remaining partner cannot continue with the case https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/169/eng@2026-01-22 2

page 2 of 3

involving that property as it is a transaction that was started during the partnership. In my humble opinion to accept the suggestion that the suit has abated because one partner died would result into absurdities as it could mean in efiect that where two partners are suing for what they conceive to be theirs or are being sued for what another person conceives to be his then any time one of the partners dies that is the end of the suit as it abates. It would make it an extreme risk doing any business with a partnership. I do feel that even after the death of a partner, the remaining partners would continue by way of winding up the partnership, with transactions into which they were involved with third parties. Being guided by the above case law and the provision in the partnership Act, the applicant as the administrator of the deceased’s estate is not keen on pursuing the partnership and having produced a certificate of title pointing to the shares contributed by each partner, there is no reason why the estate should be tied to a partnership it no longer wants to be part of. Determination: 12. The applicant has established valid grounds for the dissolution of the partnership and the application is merited and the same is allowed as prayed. Costs awarded such that each party will bear its own costs. It is so ordered! DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI ON THIS 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2026. MOHAMMED N. KULLOW JUDGE Judgment delivered in the presence of: No appearance for the Applicant No appearance for 1st Respondent No appearance for 2nd Respondent Philomena W. ____ Court Assistant https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2026/169/eng@2026-01-22 3

page 3 of 3