[2025] KECPT 306 (KLR)

Chege v Orokise Coop.Savings & Credit Society Limited (Tribunal Case 298 of 2018) [2025] KECPT 306 (KLR) (29 May 2025) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 306 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Tribunal Case 298 of 2018

BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki & PO Aol, Members

May 29, 2025

Between

Oliver Ndung’u Chege

Claimant

and

Orokise Coop.Savings & Credit Society Limited

Respondent

Judgment

1. This Claim is instituted through an Amended Statement of Claim date 28/6/2018. The Claimant alleges that he was a mother of the Respondent and owned four vehicles: KBC 0X0S

KBY 6X0X

KBU 9X9T

KBA 5X8S

2. He states that during 21. 4.2018 Annual General Meeting, he was expelled without proper hearing. The Claimant alleges that he had savings of Kshs 752,000/= and that he returned Cheque of Kshs. 552,154/= of 26. 4.2018 to the respondent.He says that alleged expulsion is an attempt to defeat issues raised in the cases in this Tribunal.

3. The Claimant prays that the declarations of 21. 4.18 where he was allegedly expelled are null and void.The Claimant alleges that the Respondent declined to apply for renewal of licence to his four vehicles and as a result he suffered loss of business as follows: KBA 5X8S-Ksh 4000

KBY 6X0X-Ksh 7000

KBU 9X9T-Ksh 7000 Per day.

4. In his witness statement, the Claimant prays for compensation for losses occasioned by the Respondent refusal to renew the licenses of his vehicles.He restates that his savings with the respondent is Kshs 752,154/=. During the hearing of the Claimants case on 15/10/2024, the Claimant adopted his witness statement of 29/6/2017 as his evidence in chief.He stated that he had two cases in this tribunal relating to issuance of TLB for his vehicles.He prayed that the Respondent be compelled to issue his vehicles with TLBs, issue him with the loan he had applied and pay him general damagesHe alleged that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself against the expulsion.He alleged that the management was punishing him for taking him to this Tribunal.The Claimant admitted that his vehicles did not have the Respondent's vehicle colors since they had another color already.

5. In his written submissions dated 9/10/2024, the Claimant restates that his expulsion from the Respondent was illegal and that he was not given a chance to defend himself during the Annual General Meeting.He further states that am the Respondent refused to issue TLB licenses for his vehicles and also refused to grant him a loan.He refers this Tribunal to its earlier order of 29. 6.2018 compelling the Respondent to apply to NTSA for renewal of road licenses for the following vehicles: KBY 6X0X

KBU 9X9T

KBA 5X8 S which was ignored.

He prays this Tribunal to award loss of income for 6 months as earlier tabulated, totaling to Kshs. 1. 980,000/=.

RESPONDENT’S CASE. 6. The Respondent case is based on the Respondent's Statement of Defence dated 27/6/2019. The Respondent admits that the Claimant was its member and owned the 4 vehicles as per Statement of Claim.

7. The Respondent denies that the Claimant was expelled for taking the Respondent to court but rather due to his repeated misconduct and that due process was followed in expelling the Claimant.The Respondent challenges the claim for damages stating that vehicles; KBY 6X0X

KBU 9X9J and KBA 5X8S had varied road licenses as at date of this Defence.

8. In their witness statement dated 27/6/2019 the Respondent Chairman Mr. Joseph Gathecha states that the Claimant had issues mainly with NTSA regarding his vehicles.He stated that the Claimant’s issues were discussed by the management and letter on gross misconduct issued to him on 30. 7.2017. He states that the Claimant failed to attend a meeting scheduled for 29. 6.2017 to show cause why he should not be disciplined but the Claimant instead filed CTC 445 of 2008 in this Tribunal.He stated that all the Claimants vehicles had valid road service licenses issued on 24. 4.2017 and 7. 6.2017. He further states that Claim for damages for loss of income for vehicles KBC 0X0 S and KBY 6X0X is baseless and unjustified.The witness says that after the services were suspended, the Claimant used this Tribunal orders and continues to operate using the Respondent Sacco name without any hindrance from NTSA and plying Ongata Rongai route hence claim for loss of user and damages baseless.The witness states that the Claimant was given an opportunity to defend himself at the board level but failed to appear nor write a letter to explain himself.

9. During the hearing of the Respondent case on 14/2/2024 the Respondent witness Mr. Gathecha stated that the Claimant is not their mother since 2018. He stated that the Claimant was expelled on 19/4/2018. He also stated that members agreed a Kshs 200,000/= legal.He stated that the Claimant attended Annual General Meeting attendance No 35. He averred that the Claimant was expelled due to misconduct.He admitted that there is nothing wrong in the Claimant filing a case against the Respondent but argues that the Claimant did not exhaust mediation process.The witness admitted they were in contempt of court orders. He explained it was NTSA that refused himself in the Annual General Meeting.On Claimants prayer on damages, he stated that only one vehicle KBY 6X0X Was under the Respondent Sacco.

10. On Claimants savings, the witness stated that they gave a refund cheques of Kshs. 552,152/= which was rejected by the Claimant, hence the Sacco still owes the Claimant his savings.The Respondent filed written submissions dated 9/1/2025 highlighting the prayers by the Claimant.The Respondent admits that the Claimant had four vehicles as per the Statement of Claim. The Respondent stated that the Claimant had various discipline issues with.

Analysis. 11. We note that the membership of the Claimant to the Respondent and ownership of the Claimant's vehicles registered was not in dispute.We also note that the Claimants savings with the Respondent are not in dispute and that the Respondent is ready to refund the Claimant.

12. As regards the expulsion of the Claimant, we observe that the issue is in dispute with the Claimant alleging that he was not given a chance to defend himself and the Respondent stating that they gave the Claimant an opportunity to defend himself.Records filed in this Tribunal confirm that the Claimant was not given an opportunity to defend himself during the Special General Meeting. The verdict was just read to him during the Annual General Meeting. It is clear that the Claimants expulsion was not subjected to the entire process especially the opportunity to defend himself if provided by Law.

13. As regards prayer (c) of the amended statement of Claim, we note that the Claimant had not filed sufficient evidence to prove the damage for loss of Kshs.1,980,000/=.The Claimant had just mentioned the losses of vehicle in paragraph 13(a) of the Amended Claim without substantiating the figures. No evidence was filed to prove but the figures were mentioned during hearing.While the Claimant may have suffered loss of business as alleged in his statement of Claim, a Claim on damages must be specifically pleaded and proved by way of documentary evidence which had not been the case in this matter.The Claim of Kshs. 1,980,000/= by the Claimant and damage for loss of business has not been adequately proved. The figure of Kshs. 1,980,000/= is however mentioned in the Claimants submissions of 29/19/2024 paragraph 10. We also note that during the hearing of the Claimant's case, the Claimant admitted that upon expulsion by the Respondent, he registered his vehicles with another Sacco.

Conclusiona.We find that the Claimant was not given a proper hearing during the expulsion process.b.We also find that the Claim in damages is not adequately pleaded and proved.c.It is not in dispute that the Claimant held savings with the Respondent. The deductions of Kshs 200,000/= as legal fees from his shares as approved by the 22/4/2018 Annual General Meeting was not in good faith and should be refunded to the Claimant. This matter can be dealt with by the Respondent.

14. Judgment is entered in favour of Claimant against Respondent in the following terms.a.An order is issued compelling the Respondent to process the application for issuance of Road Service Licence for motor vehicle registration no. KBC 303S and KBY 6X0 from NTSA. Badges for the Crew.b.Prayer b and c failsc.Costs to the Claimant.

JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2025. HON. B. KIMEMIA CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 29. 5.2025HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 29. 5.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE MEMBER SIGNED 29. 5.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA MEMBER SIGNED 29. 5.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI MEMBER SIGNED 29. 5.2025HON. P. AOL MEMBER SIGNED 29. 5.2025Tribunal Clerk MutaiNgau advocate for the ClaimantAmbani advocate for Respondent – No appearanceHon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 29. 5.2025