[2024] KECPT 1703 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the claimant was indeed a member of the respondent Sacco and had withdrawn his membership. The respondent's own submissions implied the claimant's membership, and the stamped member statement was accepted as credible evidence of the amount claimed. The Tribunal held that the respondent's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KECPT 1703 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Albert Owuor Achacha; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco Ltd
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E208/CTC 110 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim allowed
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Refund of Member Deposits, Cooperative Societies Membership, Liquidated Claims, Admissibility of Electronic Evidence
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Albert Owuor Achacha
Applicant
Metropolitan National Sacco Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant has proved entitlement to refund of deposits from the respondent Sacco on a balance of probabilities.
- 2 Whether the respondent's financial difficulties or internal resolutions can lawfully suspend the claimant's right to refund.
- 3 Whether the absence of a certificate of electronic evidence renders the claimant's documentary evidence inadmissible.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the claimant was indeed a member of the respondent Sacco and had withdrawn his membership. The respondent's own submissions implied the claimant's membership, and the stamped member statement was accepted as credible evidence of the amount claimed. The Tribunal held that the respondent's financial difficulties and internal resolutions suspending refunds could not override the statutory right of a member to a refund of deposits, as long as the society was not in liquidation. The absence of a certificate of electronic evidence did not render the claimant's statement inadmissible, as the Tribunal is not strictly bound by the Evidence Act. The Tribunal therefore...
Court Disposition
claim allowed
Orders
- Immediate refund of Ksh. 149,146.88 to the claimant.
- The claimant is awarded costs of the suit together with interest from the date of filing at Tribunal rates until payment in full.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Achacha v Metropolitan National Sacco Ltd (Tribunal Case E208/CTC 110 of 2024) [2024] KECPT 1703 (KLR) (31 October 2024) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2024] KECPT 1703 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case E208/CTC 110 of 2024
BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
October 31, 2024
Between
Albert Owuor Achacha
Claimant
and
Metropolitan National Sacco Ltd
Respondent
(Coram: Hon. B. Kimemia- chairperson, Hon. J. Mwatsama- Deputy chairperson, Hon. B. Sawe- Member, Hon. F. Lotuiya- Member, Hon.P. Gichuki- Member, Hon. M. Chesikaw- Member and Hon. P. Aol- Member.)
Judgment
1. The matter for determination is a Statement of Claim dated 6th March 2024 in which the Claimant claims that he was a member of the Respondent being member number 120835. The Claimant avers that he withdrew from membership in the year 2023 and is yet to receive his savings amounting to Kshs. 169,146. 00/-. The claimant therefore prays fora.The Claimant be paid his total contribution as particularized in paragraph 3 herein above amounting to Kshs. 169,146/=b.The Honourable court do issue such orders and give such directions as it may deem fit to meet the ends of justice.c.The Respondent to pay the costs of this claim.d.Interest on the above at court ratesThe Claim is accompanied by a witness statement, and documents in support of the claim.
2. The Respondent filed a Response to Statement of Claim in which they contend that the Claimant has not sufficiently established that the Respondent is in possession of her shares and or deposits. They further aver that the Respondent has been through so much financial turmoil, and is overwhelmed by various applicants seeking to withdraw from the society.
3. The matter was canvassed by way of submissions and hence there was no hearing.
4. Both parties filed their submissions. In their submissions, the Claimants submitted that they have proven their case on a balance of probabilities and that judgement should be entered in their favour.
5. In their submissions, the Respondents submitted that the Claimant has not established that the Respondent is in possession of their shares. They also submit that there was a resolution that was passed suspending all refunds, and that resolution was sent to the Claimant and that the resolution bound all the members of the Sacco since it arose out of an annual meeting. They also submitted that the member statement is not admissible because there is no certificate of electronic evidence produced to warrant its admission.
6. The Respondents further submit that an inquiry report found former directors guilty of embezzling the Respondent’s funds, and that the Respondent has lost a lot of money and crucial documents that it cannot now determine who took loans and who guarantees other members.
7. The Respondents pray to this Honourable court to give the new management which is only 7 months in office time to recover critical documents which include member statements.
Analysis 8. This Tribunal has considered the submissions by the parties and the documents filed by the parties. This Tribunal notes that the Respondent, in its Statement of Defence, disputes paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim. In that paragraph, the Claimant claims that he was a member of the Respondent, that he withdrew his membership and that requested to be refunded his shares. However, in the same statement and even in its submissions, there is an implication that the Claimant was indeed a member of the Respondent. For instance, the Respondent submits that the Claimant could have a loan or could have guaranteed other members loans. This can only happen when one is a member. We are, therefore, inclined to belief that the Claimant was a member of the Respondent.
9. This Tribunal sympathizes with the Respondent’s financial situation. However, on the other hand, in matters of refunds, is a member’s right to his deposits. The Co-operative Societies Act is clear on the concept of voluntary membership to a Co-operative Tribunal. As long as the Co-operative society is in operation, and has not gone into liquidation, it is expected to honor its obligation to its members. The good thing is that refund claims are liquidated sums, and the Respondent can go after, when it has regularized its books and brought order into operations.
10. On the issue of certificate of electronic evidence, it is true that the Claimant did not submit it. However, this court is not strictly bound by the rules under the Evidence Act.
11. The question, that this Tribunal now asks itself is whether the Claimant has sufficiently proved his claim on a balance of probabilities and if he is entitled to a refund.
12. The Claimant has produced a statement dated 9th February 2024 and stamped on the same day by the Respondent. The Respondent has not disputed their stamp in the statement, and this Tribunal is inclined to belief that it was extracted from the Claimant's account with the Respondent. The Claimant has not provided us with the calculations of how it came up with Ksh. 169,146. 00/-, and therefore this court will enter judgement on the value on the face of the statement.
13. Flowing from above, we find merit in the Claimants Claim and order as follows-a.Immediate refund of Ksh. 149,146. 88/- to the Claimantb.The Claimant is awarded costs of this suit together with interest from date of filing suit at Tribunal rates until payment in full.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024. HON. B. KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 31. 10. 2024HON. PAUL AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 31. 10. 2024TRIBUNAL CLERK JEMIMAHOrango advocate for ClaimantMs. Benson holding brief for Muriuki advocate for RespondentMs. Benson advocate- I pray for 30 days stay of executionOrango advocate – No objectionOrder- 30 days stay of execution granted.