[2023] KECPT 1095 (KLR)
The tribunal found that the claimant had sufficiently explained and evidenced the genesis and calculation of her claim for Kshs. 600,500, including supporting correspondence and documentation. The respondent failed to provide any evidence to challenge the claimed amount or to substantiate its denial of the...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KECPT 1095 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Nancy Wangui Kingori; Respondent: National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 725 (E771) of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim allowed in favour of the claimant.
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Deposits, Withdrawal of Membership, Proof of Debt, Burden of Proof
- 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
Nancy Wangui Kingori
Applicant
National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant proved entitlement to Kshs. 600,500 as deposits held by the respondent.
- 2 Whether the respondent rebutted the claimant's evidence regarding the claimed amount.
- 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to costs and interest.
Ratio Decidendi
The tribunal found that the claimant had sufficiently explained and evidenced the genesis and calculation of her claim for Kshs. 600,500, including supporting correspondence and documentation. The respondent failed to provide any evidence to challenge the claimed amount or to substantiate its denial of the withdrawal letter. The tribunal held that a bare denial, unsupported by evidence, could not defeat a claim that was otherwise substantiated. Accordingly, the tribunal found in favour of the claimant for the sum of Kshs. 600,500, together with costs and interest at tribunal rates from the date of filing the claim.
Court Disposition
Claim allowed in favour of the claimant.
Orders
- The respondent shall pay the claimant Kshs. 600,500.
- The respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
24 paragraphs
Kingori v National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 725 (E771) of 2022) [2023] KECPT 1095 (KLR) (Civ) (14 December 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KECPT 1095 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Civil
Tribunal Case 725 (E771) of 2022
BM Kimemia, Chair, J. Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
December 14, 2023
Between
Nancy Wangui Kingori
Claimant
and
National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited
Respondent
Judgment
Claimant’s Case. 1. The Claimant’s case is contained in the Statement of Claim dated 8/8/2022, Claimant’s Witness Statement dated 8/8/2022, List of Documents dated 8/8/2022 and other Claimants Supporting Affidavit dated 3/12/2022. The Claimant has not filed Written Submissions as directed by the Court on 18/7/2023 and further on 11/10/2023 whereby the Respondent was given 7 days to file Written Submissions.
2. As per the Statement of Claim, the Claimant is praying for Kshs. 650,000/=. In the Claimant’s Witness Statement, the Claimant narrated how the figure of Kshs. 650,000/= claim was derived. This was after providing for Kshs. 20,000/= non-refundable Share Capital.The Claimant has explained her refusal to accent Kshs. 20,000/= monthly refund arrangement.
3. The Claimant counter offer of Kshs. 150,000/= per month has not been acknowledged.The Claimant has filed a pay slip to show that she was a member of the Respondent but the claimed figure is not reflected in the pay slip.She has also filed her letter of withdrawal dated 28/5/2021 without indicating the amount.The said letter was acknowledged by the Respondent but no mention of the claimed amount.
4. The Claimant advocate in his letter to the Respondent dated 18/5/2022 cited the figure of Kshs. 621,000/= as the Claimant’s deposits held by Respondent.There is no record in the court file denying the figure of Kshs. 600,500/= as the Claimant’s dues.The Claimant Advocate letter to the Respondent Advocate dated 26/5/2022 has mentioned the figure of Kshs.600,500/= as owed to the Claimant.Again, it explained the difference between the figures of Kshs. 621,000/= and Kshs. 600,500/=. The difference is occasioned by reducing by Kshs.20,500/= (membership fee of Kshs 500/= and Share Capital of Kshs. 20,000/=).The Claimant has to a large extent explained the genesis of the claimed amount of Kshs. 600,500/=.
Respondent’s Case. 5. The Respondent’s case is based on the Respondent’s Statement of Defence dated 15/11/2022 wherein the Respondent puts the Claimant to task to prove the figure of Kshs. 600,500/=.By the time of Writing this judgement, the court did not have in their possession the Respondent’s submissions as ordered by the court on 11/10/2023. The court will therefore rely on the Respondent’s Statement of Defence in determining the Respondent’s case.
6. In the Respondent’s Statement of Defence of 15/11/2022, the Respondents prays for dismissal of the Claimant’s case stating that they did not receive Claimant’s Letter of Withdrawal and that the Claimant should prove the amount claimed.The court will therefore rely on the Respondent’s Statement of Defence to determine the Defence case.
Analysis/ Conclusion. 7. At the onset, it is evident that the Claimant has prosecuted her case to the satisfaction of the court. She has taken the court through the genesis of her Claim and the tabulation thereon while she has not provided evidence on how Kshs. 621,500/= was arrived at, the Respondent has not challenged this figure during the court proceedings.The Respondent through the Statement of Defence has denied the Statement of Claim as regards to the amounts claimed and the Letter of Withdrawal. Beside the denial, the Defendant has not brought any evidence to counter the Claim.
Conclusion. 8. We find that the Claimant has explained to the court the genesis of her Claim. The Defendant beside denying the Claim has not persuaded the court on any other figure besides the claimed figure.The court finds that the Claimant has produced sufficient evidence to prove her claim.Equally, the court finds that the Defendant has merely denied the content of Statement of Claim without any evidence to challenge the Claim.We therefore find in favour of Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs. 600,500/= plus costs and interest at Tribunal rates from the date of filing the Claim
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023. HON. BEATRICE KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 14. 12. 2023HON. PAUL AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 14. 12. 2023TRIBUNAL CLERK JONAHNo appearance by parties.Judgment delivered in absence of parties.HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 14. 12. 2023