[2025] KECPT 337 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that while the Claimant provided some evidence of membership and deductions, she failed to fully prove her claim to the specific sum sought. The Respondent did not substantiate its defense with documentary evidence of the alleged suspension of refunds or the impact of judicial review proceedings....
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 337 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Esther N. Iraya; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 924.E949 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Claim / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- claim dismissed
- Judges
- Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Refunds, Withdrawal of Membership, Deposit Recovery
- 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
Esther N. Iraya
Applicant
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant was a member of the Respondent’s Sacco.
- 2 Whether the Respondent owes the Claimant any money, and if so, how much.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that while the Claimant provided some evidence of membership and deductions, she failed to fully prove her claim to the specific sum sought. The Respondent did not substantiate its defense with documentary evidence of the alleged suspension of refunds or the impact of judicial review proceedings. However, the Tribunal had directed both parties to provide further evidence—specifically, the Claimant to produce deduction evidence and the Respondent to provide a statement of account. Neither party complied with these directions. In the absence of sufficient proof from the Claimant and no response to the Tribunal's request for further evidence, the Tribunal held that the...
Court Disposition
claim dismissed
Orders
- The claim is dismissed for want of proof.
- No order as to costs.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Iraya v Metropolitan National Sacco Limited (Tribunal Case 924. E949 of 2023) [2025] KECPT 337 (KLR) (12 June 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 337 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 924. E949 of 2023
Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
June 12, 2025
(Coram: 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.
Between
Esther N. Iraya
Claimant
and
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. Matter for determination is Statement of Claim dated 14/11/2023 filed on 21/12/2023. Claimant avers have been a member of Respondent’s Sacco and had savings of Kshs. 551,889. 00. On 13/05/2022 Claimant wrote a letter to Respondent expressing her wish to withdraw membership but as at the time of this suit no refunds had been made to her.Claimant’s prayers are for:a.The said sum of Kshs. 551,889/=b.Costs of the suit and interest until payment in full.c.Any other relief so deemed appropriate by this Honourable Tribunal.Claimant filed List of Documents dated 14th November 2023 filed on 21/17/2023 which list included:a.Withdrawal Letterb.Payslip
2. Respondent filed Statement of Defence dated 04/03/2024 filed on 15/03/2024. The Respondent deny the Claim by the Claimant and put her to strict prove.Respondent avers Claimant has not proved the Respondent is in possession of her deposits and that Claimant has not has not been truthful by omitting facts to the Tribunal that there was a resolution passed in its Annual General Meeting that all refunds be suspended and it was binding to all members.Further the Respondent state it is having financial challenges and overwhelmed by various applicants seeking withdrawal and matter of mismanagement by previous committee is being handled in High Court Judicial Review Case.Respondent pray for the claim to be dismissed.
3. This matter being one of refunds the Tribunal directed parties to file and serve their Written Submissions to fast track disposing off the claim. The Claimant filed Written Submissions dated 02/01/2025 and Respondent as the date of writing this Judgement thus Respondent had not filed their Written Submissions. The issues for determination are these:Issue One:Whether the Claimant was a member of the Respondent’s Sacco?Issue Two:Whether the Respondent owes the Claimant and how much?
Issue One: Whether the Claimant was a member of Respondent Sacco? 4. The Claimant avers she was a member of the Respondent’s Sacco. To prove this the Claimant in her List of Documents provided her payslips to prove deductions. In the said payslip for February 2016 it shows indeed Claimant was being deducted funds as at the date of February 2016 the Claimant had savings of Kshs. 308,000. 00. To this we find the Claimant was indeed a member of Respondent’s Sacco.
Issue Two How much is owed to the Claimant by Respondent? 5. The Respondent despite denials does not offer much to show that they do not owe the Claimant any money. The Claimant through her payslip in List of Documents has shown deductions to her payslip being made to the Respondent.How else would that be if she was not a member?The Respondent does not state whether Claimant has liabilities or not. The Respondent only state they passed a resolution to suspend refunds and the said resolution is not filed and we do not know when it was done and how long the suspension was for.We further have no detail of the Judicial Review Case filed in the High Court by the Respondent and how it affects the Claimant’s refund.As such we are inclined to find in favour of Claimant. The Payslip is for the year 2016 and we note there was a loan taken by the Claimant.With no evidence from the Respondent whether the same was repaid in full or not.On a balance of probability, we would have entered favour of Claimant against Respondent for Kshs. 551,889. 00 plus costs and interest.
SIGNEDHON. J. MWATSAMA – DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON07/06/2025ADDENDUMWe note we wrote to the Claimant to produce evidence of deductions and Respondent to produce evidence via Claimant’s statement of account.An email dated 09/06/2025 was sent. There being no response.The Claim is not proved and as such fails and is dismissed with no orders as to costs.JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025. HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. P. AOL MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025Tribunal Clerk MutaiNo appearance by parties.Judgment delivered in the absence of the parties.HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 12. 6.2025