A 21-year-old genocide survivor has dragged his relative to the Nyarugenge Intermediate Court in a last attempt to inherit his grandfather’s property, currently occupied by a relative.Aimable Twizeyimana contends never got a chance to know his father who died during the Genocide against the Tutsis in 1994 when he was two. His direct paternal grandfather, identified as Leopold Gatare, and his two brothers ,also died during the Genocide leaving the property with no surviving offspring to bequeath it to.From his mother, Twizeyimana learnt that he was the only one who had the right to succession of the property as a grand son.That’s how his mother represented him in court and filed a case to demand the properties after Jean Pierre Higiro allegedly refused to surrender them.But Higiro argues that there are other legatees who entrusted him with the property and the youth has no right to own anything.The multi-million estate includes four houses, a plot and seven pieces of arable land, including tree and banana plantations in Mageragere-Nyarugenge and Kigarama-Kicukiro districts.The case was first filed when the petitioner was a minor, hence represented by his mother. Higiro, 50, avers that he is a cousin of Nizeyimana’s grandparents.Evidence before courtTwizeyimana’s lawyer presented the birth certificates of the claimant and his grandparents’ death certificates as evidence that he was the only one meant to inherit the fortunes.He also gave different reports from local leaders, who reportedly agreed that the right to succession belonged to Twizeyimana. To the court’s surprise, however, Higiro’s lawyer presented new evidence according to which all these belongings came from Twizeyimana’s great grandfather."There are two grand children of the property owner; Richard Rwamu and Yvonne Mukanyangezi, who are both in Uganda. Thus, Twizeyimana, a great grand child cannot own anything before them,” Higiro’s lawyer said.The court told the defendant that it was very unprofessional to submit new evidence without prior notice to the plaintiff’s side so that they can examine it, adding that, there is no convincing evidence that the two people exist.The ruling has been set for March 22.