[2023] KECPT 1092 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove her membership, the amount of deposits made, and the outstanding loan guarantees. The Respondent's denial of receipt of the withdrawal letter was not supported by evidence, and the Respondent did not provide an alternative...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2023] KECPT 1092 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Freshiah Waithera Kinuthia; Respondent: Metropolitan Sacco Society Ltd
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 390 (E521) of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim allowed in part
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Deposits, Withdrawal of Membership, Refund of Deposits, Guaranteed Loans, Liability of Sacco, Interest on Awards
- 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
Freshiah Waithera Kinuthia
Applicant
Metropolitan Sacco Society Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to a refund of her deposits from the Respondent Sacco upon withdrawal of membership.
- 2 Whether the Respondent's denial of receipt of the withdrawal letter affects the Claimant's entitlement to the claimed amount.
- 3 Whether the Respondent's liquidity problems justify withholding the Claimant's refund.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had provided sufficient documentary evidence to prove her membership, the amount of deposits made, and the outstanding loan guarantees. The Respondent's denial of receipt of the withdrawal letter was not supported by evidence, and the Respondent did not provide an alternative calculation or substantive rebuttal to the Claimant's figures. The Tribunal held that liquidity problems do not absolve the Sacco from its statutory obligation to refund a withdrawing member's deposits. The claim for dividends was dismissed for lack of proof. Accordingly, judgment was entered for the Claimant for the net sum of Kshs. 309,368 plus costs and interest at Tribunal...
Court Disposition
claim allowed in part
Orders
- The Respondent shall pay the Claimant Kshs. 309,368 plus costs and interest at Tribunal rates from the date of filing the claim.
- The claim for dividends for the years 2017 to 2020 is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
21 paragraphs
Kinuthia v Metropolitan Sacco Society Ltd (Tribunal Case 390 (E521) of 2022) [2023] KECPT 1092 (KLR) (14 December 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2023] KECPT 1092 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 390 (E521) of 2022
BM Kimemia, Chair, J. Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
December 14, 2023
Between
Freshiah Waithera Kinuthia
Claimant
and
Metropolitan Sacco Society Ltd
Respondent
Judgment
1. The Claimant’s case is contained in the Statement of Claim dated 7/7/2022, List of Documents dated 5/7/2022 and Claimants Submissions of 1/11/2023, wherein the Claimant is claiming Kshs. 309,368/= from the Respondent.
2. In the List of Documents, the Claimant has produced her pay slip for November, 2020, which reflects the cumulative deductions to the Respondent totaling Kshs. 636,548. 77/=. Her letter of withdrawal dated 18/2/2022 acknowledges that the Claimant had guaranteed some Kshs. 332,180/= in loans.
Defence Case. 3. The Defence case is contained in the Defence Statement dated 1/11/2022 and Respondent’s List of Documents dated 1/11/2022. In the Statement of Defence, the Respondent can confirm that the Claimant is a member of the Respondent; Member No. 11407 and had an account with the Respondent where she was making monthly deposits.
4. The Respondent however denies receiving Claimant’s letter of withdrawal and states that the letter of withdrawal filed in court is not date stamped by the Respondent hence doubting its authenticity.
5. As regards, the Claimant claim of Kshs. 641,548. 70/=, the Respondent denies the figure and puts the Claimant to strict proof thereof. The Respondent states that they have put refunds on hold due to liquidity problem.
Finding/ Conclusion. 6. We find that the Claimant has adequately prosecuted her case. She has filed in court evidence to show that indeed she was deducted monies towards the deposits with the Respondent.On the other hand, the Respondent has merely denied the claim figure without offering an alternative figure after accepting the Claimant was its member.We find that the Claimant has proved her case to the court and that the Response was a mere denial of the claim.We also acknowledge that the Respondent has not denied the Claimant’s calculation of Kshs 641,548. 70/= less Kshs. 332,180/= being loan balance.The net balance as per Claimant is Kshs. 309,368/=.The court finds in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs. 309,368/= plus costs and interest at Tribunal rates from the date of filing the Claim.Prayer (b) on dividends from the year 2017 to 2020 has not been proved on a balance of probabilities, hence fails.
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 JonahKorir advocate for the RespondentFreshiah Waithera - PresentKorir advocate – We pray for 30 days stay of execution.Freshiah Waithera- I need the money immediatelyTribunal orders:Respondent granted 21 days stay of execution.HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 14. 12. 2023