Soita Shitanda widow loses fight to lock twin sisters out of Sh100million estate

The High Court has recognised two twin sisters as biological daughters of the late Housing minister Soita Shitanda paving the way for them to have their share of his estate estimated at over Sh100million.

In his ruling, Milimani High Court Judge Hillary Chemitei, however, noted that since the two sisters, Candy Kateve Soita and Brandy Mbeyu Soita, currently live abroad, it is not possible to manage the late Malava MP’s estate jointly with his widow, Betty Glorious Soita and her sons Terrence Shitanda and Peter Ngaira Shitanda, who were also parties in the case.

He directed that a joint grant be issued to the trio, who had sought to exclude the twins,  but that any action on the estate must be done with sufficient notice to the sisters and/or their counsel on record.

Betty, Terence and Ngaira had applied for for letters of administration, as the wife and children respectively, following the former minister’s death on 24th May 2016.

However, the twins filed their objection dated 1st December 2022 on the grounds that they were not consulted as they are the deceased’s children courtesy of the marriage between Shitanda and their mother Agnes Nduku Kiuvu.

Prior to filing their objection their mother had withdrawn her objection paving way for them to file theirs and the Children’s court gave directions for the objection to be heard orally.

Candy testified online stating that she was the daughter of the late minister together with her sister, Brandy, and produced several evidence including certificates of births indicating that they were born twins on 17th May 2001 and the deceased was their biological father.

She also produced court proceedings at the Children’s Court between their mother and Shitanda, and indicated that he had admitted that he was their father.

There were also other receipts of school fees and cheques made by the deceased in favour of the schools which they had been enrolled. It was therefore her case that all along the deceased had recognised them as his children,” Justice Chemitei noted.

However, Betty testified that she was the only wife to the deceased having solemnised her marriage with the deceased first customarily and thereafter at the Attorney General’s office and denied knowing the twins or at all and that the only time she saw them was in the print media during the burial of the deceased.

She also denied disposing the estate properties as advanced by the twin sisters since in any case she did not have letters of administration.

The Children’s court directed the parties to file written submissions which they have and I have perused the same. The twins submitted that they have established that they are entitled to the estate herein by virtue of being his children from his union with their mother.

They averred was, therefore, no reason not to have considered them and for that matter the objection be allowed.

Betty, Terence and Ngaira, on the other hand, argued in their submissions that the same was premature as the grant had not been gazetted and thus the objection ought to be dismissed.

“I have perused the entire suit and the evidence on board as well as the submissions by the parties. I find that there is no doubt that prima facie and based on the uncontested certificates of birth the two Objectors are deceased’s children,” Justice Chemitei said.

He noted that the proceedings at the Children’s Court (No. 642 of 2008 Agnes Nduku Kiuvu v. Peter Soita Shitanda) clearly demonstrated that he took care of them and the cheques issued to various institutions they schooled sufficiently proves their relationship with the deceased.

“In the premises and barring any other evidence or technicalities which I think the Petitioners are taking I hold that the Objectors are deceased’s children and for all intents and purposes entitled to his estate. On the issue of being granted joint administration, I think because of the fact that the Objectors are not based within Kenya it becomes difficult for them to manage the estate in the manner suggested,” Justice Chemitei added.

“I do not as well find any evidence of intermeddling with the estate by the Petitioners since they have not been granted any letters of administration. If there is any then there is sufficient time especially when the estate shall be distributed. I also note, regrettably, that the parties have spent so much on interlocutory applications. The estate must move on and be brought into finality whatever the results.”

Justice Chemitei directed that the joint grant be gazetted forthwith.