https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kecopt/2026/241
The Respondent’s denial of receipt of the alleged payment and its explanation regarding fraud affecting the original land and the availability of alternative land raised substantive triable issues touching on liability and the alleged transaction. Because those issues require evidence at a full hearing, the extreme...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2026] KECOPT 241 (KLR)
- Parties
- Claimant: CYLUS AZEGERE KADURENGE; Respondent: TUNZA HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E069 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Co Operative Tribunal Application for Striking Out Statement of Response and Summary Judgment / Interlocutory Ruling on Notice of Motion
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Judges
- ["J Mwatsama", "B Sawe", "F Lotuiya", "M Chesikaw", "PO Aol"]
- Legal Topics
- Striking Out Pleadings, Summary Judgment, Triable Issues, Alleged Payment for Land Allocation, Interlocutory Application
- 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
CYLUS AZEGERE KADURENGE
Claimant
TUNZA HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Co Operative Tribunal Application for Striking Out Statement of Response and Summary Judgment / Interlocutory Ruling on Notice of Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondent’s Statement of Response should be struck out
- 2 Whether the Claimant is entitled to summary judgment
- 3 Whether the defence raises bona fide triable issues
Ratio Decidendi
The Respondent’s denial of receipt of the alleged payment and its explanation regarding fraud affecting the original land and the availability of alternative land raised substantive triable issues touching on liability and the alleged transaction. Because those issues require evidence at a full hearing, the extreme remedies of striking out and summary judgment were refused.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- Notice of Motion dated 14 May 2025 dismissed
- Costs of the application awarded to the Respondent
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
**REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL AT KISUMU** **TRIBUNAL CASE No. E069/2024** **(Coram: Hon. J. Mwatsama- Ag. Chairperson, Hon. B. Sawe- Member, Hon. F. Lotuiya- Member, Hon. M. Chekisaw- Member and Hon. P. Aol- Member.)** **CYLUS AZEGERE KADURENGE……………………………..……... CLAIMANT** **-VERSUS-** **TUNZA HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY……………....… RESPONDENT** **RULING OF THE TRIBUNAL** 1. Before the Tribunal is the Claimant’s Notice of Motion seeking the following orders: 2. That the Respondent’s Statement of Response be struck out and/or the claim be summarily dismissed against the Respondent; 3. That summary judgment be entered for the Claimant as prayed in the Statement of Claim; 4. That costs of the Application be borne by the Respondent. 5. The Application arises from a dispute involving an alleged payment of **Kshs. 2,100,000/=** said to have been made by the Claimant to the Respondent Sacco for allocation of six parcels of land, which the Claimant contends was never effected. 6. The Claimant avers that he remitted the sum of **Kshs. 2,100,000/=** to the Respondent for purposes of acquiring six parcels of land under a proposed allocation scheme by the Sacco. 7. The Respondent denies receiving the said funds as alleged. It further pleads that although land intended for distribution to members was fraudulently acquired by a third party, the Sacco notified members, including the Claimant, and subsequently identified alternative land available for acquisition. 8. In reply, the Claimant terms the Respondent’s explanation a sham and contends that if alternative land existed, he ought to have been given an option either to accept it or be refunded. 9. The issue for determination is whether the Application is merited, whether the Respondent’s Statement of Response should be struck out and whether the Claimant is entitled to Summary Judgment. 10. The power to strike out pleadings is discretionary and ought to be exercised sparingly and only in plain and obvious cases. In **D.T. Dobie & Company (Kenya) Ltd v Muchina [1982] KLR 1**, the Court held that no suit ought to be summarily dismissed unless it appears so hopeless that it plainly discloses no reasonable cause of action and is beyond redemption. 11. Similarly, summary judgment is only available where the defense raises no bona fide triable issue. In **Industrial and Commercial Development Corporation v Daber Enterprises Ltd [2000] 1 EA 75**, the Court held that where a defendant demonstrates even one triable issue, the matter ought to proceed to full hearing. 12. The Tribunal has also considered the principles under **Order 2 Rule 15** and **Order 36 of the Civil Procedure Rules**, which guide the court on striking out pleadings and entry of Summary Judgment respectively. 13. In the present case, the Respondent has denied receipt of the alleged payment and has raised issues regarding the existence and performance of the alleged land transaction, including alleged fraud affecting the original land and the availability of alternative land. These are substantive issues that go to the root of liability and require evidence to be tested at a full hearing. 14. The Tribunal is therefore satisfied that there exist triable issues which cannot be resolved at this interlocutory stage. 15. Accordingly, the application lacks merit. **FINAL ORDERS** 1. The Notice of Motion dated 14th may 2025 is hereby dismissed. 2. Cost of the application are awarded to the Respondent. 3. The matter shall proceed to full hearing. 4. Mention date for pretrial date on **24/6/2026.** It is so ordered. Ruling dated and delivered virtually at **Nairobi** this **14t**h day of **May, 2026.** **Hon. J. Mwatsama Ag. Chairperson Signed 14/5/2026** **Hon. Beatrice Sawe Member Signed 14/5/2026** **Hon. Fridah Lotuiya Member Signed 14/5/2026** **Hon. Michael Chesikaw Member Signed 14/5/2026** **Hon. P. Aol Member Signed 14/5/2026** Court Assistant – Mutai Mr. Oningo Advocate for the Claimant Muranja Advocate holding brief for Mrs. Odoyo Advocate for the Respondent. **Hon. J. Mwatsama Ag. Chairperson Signed 14/5/2026**