[2025] KECPT 187 (KLR)

Kinyua v National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 728/E776A of 2022) [2025] KECPT 187 (KLR) (27 February 2025) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 187 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Tribunal Case 728/E776A of 2022

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

February 27, 2025

Between

Lydia Wairimu Kinyua

Claimant

and

National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited

Respondent

Judgment

1. The matter for determination is a Statement of Claim dated 8th August 2022. In the Statement of Claim, the Claimant avers that she was a member of the Respondents membership 00494 and she formally withdrew from the Respondent on 28th September 2021 and her withdrawal was approved on 8th November 2021, and she had accumulated Ksh. 564,000/= in form of share capital, deposits and membership fee. The Claimant posits that she despite the Respondent acknowledging that it has her deposits, she is yet to be given the same. The Claimants feel aggrieved and, therefore, prays for :a.The said sum of Kshs. 543,500/= together with interest at the rate of 14% per annum from 8th November, 2021 aforesaid until full payment thereof.b.Costs of the suit with interest at court rates.c.Such further and/or other further relief this Honurable court may deem fit and just to grant.The Claimant also filed a Witness Statement and a List of Documents in support of her claim.

2. The Respondent entered appearance on the 28th October 2022, and filed a Statement of defence on 15th November 2022. In their Defence, the Respondents deny the existence of the deposits or the amount that is being claimed by the Claimant.

3. The matter was canvased via written submissions. In their submissions, The Claimants submitted that they had proved their case on a balance of probablility judging from the exhibits that were produced before this Tribunal. They also submit that the Respondent is guilty of unjust enrichment since they have continually held the Respondent’s accumulated deposits and used it to lend its members at an interest rate of 14%.

Analysis 4. This Tribunal has taken note of the pleadings filed by the parties. It is not in dispute that the Claimant was a member of the Respondent. It not in dispute that the Claimant sought to withdraw from the Respondent and that the Respondent is yet to repay her savings, if any. The only issue in dispute is whether the the Respondents indeed had deposits with the Claimant.

5. The matter was canvased through written submissions. By the time of writing this judgement, only the Claimants had filed their submissions. In their Statement of Defence, the Respondents did not attach any witness statements or documents. On its part, the Claimant filed a witness statement that reiterated the contents of the Claim. They also filed documents in support of the Claim. The documents are the Claimant’s payslip, letter of withdrawal, Respondents letter to the Claimant, a Demand Letter, letter from the Respondent’s advocate, a letter from the Claimant’s advocate. The Claimant’s payslip produced is for the month of September 2021. The same month that the Claimant claims she withdrew from the Respondent. The balance indicated under NHIF SACCO in the payslip amounts Ksh. 564,000/-. The letter from the Respondent dated 8th November 2021 acknowleges the Claimant’s withdrawal from the Respondent. In that letter, the Respondent informs that the Claimant that her case will be transferred to the Credit Committee to deliberate on her share refund and that she would be contacted when the same is approved for payment. The letter from the Respondent’s advocate acknowledge the amounts owed to the Claimant and proposes a payment plan. The Respondent did not adduce any evidence to contradict the statements or the documents produced, neither did they deny the authenticity of the documents produced by the Claimant that came from them. We are inclined to believe the Claimant and we hereby firn that she has proved her claim beyond any reasonable doubt that she had deposits with the Respondents and the same is owing.

6. The Claimants did not adduce any evidence to show unjust enrichment on the part of the Respondent’s. There is no documentation showing that the Respondent loans out the particular Claimant’s shares to other members at at 14%.

7. The upshot of the above is that we find merit in the Claimant’s claim. We order as follows:a.A refund of Kshs. 543,500/=.c.Costs of suit and interest at Tribunal rates from date of filing suit.

JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025. Hon. B. Kimemia - Chairperson Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. J. Mwatsama - Deputy Chairperson Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. Beatrice Sawe - Member Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. Fridah Lotuiya - Member Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. Philip Gichuki - Member Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. Michael Chesikaw - Member Signed 27. 2.2025Hon. Paul Aol - Member Signed 27. 2.2025Tribunal Clerk MutaiMs. Nyaata holding brief for Kimondo Advocate for ClaimantNo appearance for RespondentHon. B. Kimemia - Chairperson Signed 27. 2.2025