Understanding Reasonable Provision in Succession Disputes: Lessons from a Recent Court of Appeal Case

At Kubwa and Company Advocates, we understand that estate and succession matters can be emotionally charged and legally complex. A recent Court of Appeal judgment in Harvinder Kaur Dadhialla v Mohamed Munir Chaudri & Others (Civil Appeal No. E309 of 2021) sheds light on the concept of “reasonable provision” under Kenya’s Law of Succession Act.

This case offers valuable insights for families navigating inheritance disputes, emphasising the balance between testamentary freedom and the rights of dependents.

What Was the Case About?

The case involved Harvinder Kaur Dadhialla, who sought a reasonable provision from her late mother Gurdip Kaur Sagoo’s estate. Gurdip died testate in 2015, leaving a will that appointed Harvinder as an executor but excluded her as a beneficiary. Instead, the estate worth about Kshs. 750 million went to her daughters-in-law, Avtar and Jaswinder Sagoo.

Harvinder argued that, as a biological child, she was entitled to a share under Section 26 of the Law of Succession Act, which allows courts to order reasonable provision for dependents if a will fails to do so.

The respondents, including the estate’s executor, Mohamed Munir Chaudri, opposed Harvinder’s claim. They argued that she had been adequately provided for during her parents’ lifetimes, citing gifts totaling Kshs. 143 million, including a £200,000 cash gift. They also referred to Harvinder’s late father, Balwant Singh Sagoo’s will, which explicitly stated that Harvinder had been provided for and should not claim from either parent’s estate.

The respondents further argued that Sikh cultural practices, which favour lifetime provisions for married daughters over inheritance, justified her exclusion.

The High Court dismissed Harvinder’s application, finding that the £200,000 gift and her father’s will provided sufficient reason for her exclusion. Unhappy with Justice Thande’s ruling delivered on May 21, 2021, at the High Court family division in Nairobi, Harvinder appealed to the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal’s Decision

The Court of Appeal, presided over by Justices P. O. KIAGE, L. ACHODE, and W. KORIR, delivered judgment on May 2, 2025, overturning the High Court’s ruling and ordered a reasonable provision of Kshs. 130 million for Harvinder. Five key points from the judgment include:

1. Testamentary Freedom vs. Dependents’ Rights: The court reaffirmed that under Section 5 of the Law of Succession Act, individuals can dispose of their property as they wish. However, this freedom is not absolute. Section 26 allows courts to intervene if a will fails to make reasonable provision for dependents, such as children, even if they weren’t financially dependent on the deceased (Section 29(a)).
2. Separate Estates, Separate Wills: The court clarified that the estates of Harvinder’s parents were distinct. Her father’s will could not dictate her mother’s decisions. The High Court failed by “importing” Balwant’s exclusion clause into Gurdip’s will. Each testator’s intentions must come from their own will.
3. Reasonable Provision Criteria: Under Section 28, courts must consider the estate’s value, the dependent’s financial needs, previous gifts, and the testator’s reasons for exclusion. The court found insufficient evidence that Harvinder was adequately provided for, noting that the £200,000 gift (Kshs. 20 million) was only 2.6% of the estate’s value and was intended for her children’s education.
4. Cultural Practices and Discrimination: Harvinder argued that excluding her based on Sikh cultural norms was discriminatory and violated Article 27 of the Constitution. The court agreed, emphasising that cultural practices cannot override legal protections against unfair treatment.
5. Reasonable, Not Equal, Provision: The court rejected Harvinder’s request for an equal share (one-fourth of the estate). It clarified that reasonable provision does not mean equal distribution. Instead, it awarded Kshs. 130 million, balancing her needs with the testator’s intent.

Why This Case Matters

This judgment highlights four critical lessons for families and legal practitioners:

1. Dependents’ Automatic Rights: Biological children are automatic dependents under Section 29(a), meaning they don’t need to prove financial dependency to seek reasonable provision. This protects children who might be unfairly excluded from a will.
2. Clear Estate Planning: You must clearly state reasons for excluding dependents in a will to avoid disputes. Ambiguity, as in Gurdip’s will, can be challenged in court.
3. Cultural Practices Under Scrutiny: Discriminatory cultural norms, such as excluding married daughters, violate constitutional principles.
4. Evidence is Key: Applicants seeking reasonable provision must show evidence of their financial needs, while those opposing must prove prior adequate provision. Harvinder’s claim succeeded partly because the respondents’ evidence of prior gifts was contested and unclear.

How Kubwa & Company Advocates Can Help

At Kubwa & Company Advocates, our experienced team specialises in estate planning, will drafting, and succession disputes. We help clients draft clear Wills that ensure their intentions are unambiguous and legally sound to minimise disputes; navigate Succession Laws; resolve disputes before escalating to court, or represent clients to secure fair outcomes in courts of law. We also plan for cultural sensitivities, which include cultural preferences in estate plans while ensuring compliance with Kenyan law.

Four Key Takeaways for Families

1. Plan Early: Work with a lawyer to draft a will that reflects your wishes and addresses dependents’ rights.
2. Be Transparent: Clearly document reasons for excluding or limiting provisions for dependents.
3. Know Your Rights: If excluded from a will, dependents can seek reasonable provision, but evidence of need is crucial.
4. Seek Legal Advice: Succession disputes can be costly and protracted. Early legal intervention can save time and resources.

Final Thoughts

The Harvinder Kaur Dadhialla case underscores the delicate balance between testamentary freedom and fairness in succession law. At Kubwa & Company Advocates, we are committed to helping families navigate these complexities with clarity and compassion. Whether you’re planning your estate or facing a dispute, our team is here to provide expert guidance.

Reach us now by Scheduling a Meeting Here or direct chat on WhatsApp Here or by clicking on the live chat in the bottom right corner.

Should you require more information, please do not hesitate to contact [email protected].