[2024] KECPT 1410 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had adequately prosecuted his case by providing documentary evidence of membership, savings, and a properly issued notice of withdrawal acknowledged by the Respondent. The Respondent failed to file any substantive evidence or submissions to rebut the Claimant's case, despite...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] KECPT 1410 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Kipkoech Taragon Kipruto; Respondent: Lavington United Sacco Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 507/ E669 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the claimant
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, J. Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Withdrawal, Refund of Shares, Notice of Withdrawal, 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
Kipkoech Taragon Kipruto
Applicant
Lavington United Sacco Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Claimant issued a proper notice of withdrawal from the Respondent Sacco.
- 2 Whether the Respondent is obligated to refund the Claimant's shares upon withdrawal.
- 3 Whether the Claimant has sufficiently proved entitlement to the claimed amount.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had adequately prosecuted his case by providing documentary evidence of membership, savings, and a properly issued notice of withdrawal acknowledged by the Respondent. The Respondent failed to file any substantive evidence or submissions to rebut the Claimant's case, despite being given opportunities by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the Claimant had established his entitlement to the refund of shares on a balance of probabilities, and the Respondent's bare denials were insufficient to defeat the claim. Accordingly, judgment was entered in favour of the Claimant for the claimed amount plus costs and interest.
Court Disposition
judgment for the claimant
Orders
- Judgment is entered in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs. 384,800 plus costs and interest.
- 30 days stay of execution granted.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
29 paragraphs
Kipruto v Lavington United Sacco Limited (Tribunal Case 507/ E669 of 2023) [2024] KECPT 1410 (KLR) (Civ) (29 August 2024) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2024] KECPT 1410 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Civil
Tribunal Case 507/ E669 of 2023
BM Kimemia, Chair, J. Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
August 29, 2024
Between
Kipkoech Taragon Kipruto
Claimant
and
Lavington United Sacco Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. The Claimant’s case is based on the Statement of Claim dated 22/8/2023, Witness Statement dated 22/8/2023, Documents dated 22/8/2023 and Claimant’s Witness Submissions dated 24/6/2024.
2. In the Statement of Claim, the Claimant states that he is a member of the Respondent member number LUO1705, with saving of Kshs. 348,800/=.He also states that he issued the Respondent with a Notice to Withdraw his shares but the Respondent has refused to comply.He prays that this Court orders the Respondent to refund his shares of Kshs. 348,800/= plus interest from the date of the withdrawal notice plus interest.
3. In his Written statement, the Claimant gives a brief history of his case, wherein he states that he joined the Respondent on 7/7/2021. He states that he decided to withdraw from the Respondent due to failure by the Respondent to process his Loan Application.He states that he filed this matter with the Small Claims Court and the matter was dismissed, hence filing in this Court.He states that he resigned from the Respondent Sacco on 8/9/2023. The Claimant has also filed documents dated 22/8/2023 in support of his case.
4. On 11/12/2023, this court directed that since this being a case of refund, the parties were to file Written Submissions within 30 days.
5. In his Written Submissions dated 24/6/2024, the Claimant invites this court to determine whether the Claimant issued a proper Notice of Withdrawal from the Respondent.He avers that the Claimant’s letter was received by the Respondent on 21/9/2022 and a maturity date of 22/12/2022 indicated on the Claimant’s letter.
6. The Claimant has produced his member Statement indicating his savings confirming that the Respondent is indebted to the Claimant.He argues that the Claimant has established his case on the balance of probability and therefore prays for the court to enter judgement in his favour against the Claimant for Kshs. 348,800/= plus interest at Tribunal rates.
Respondent’s Case 7. The Respondent’s case is based on the Defence to the Statement of Claim dated 5/10/2023 wherein he states that the Claimant has not sufficiently proved that the Respondent in possession of his shares and the Claimant’s claim is made in bad faith.He denies that he has denied to refund the Claimant his savings.He equally denies that he holds savings of the Claimant and puts him to strict proof.
8. No other documents have been filed by the Respondent despite the Court’s direction on 14/5/2024 for the Respondent to supply the Claimant with the claimant’s statement of account.
9. On 11/12/2023, this court further directed that parties’ files Written Submissions which the Respondent has not filed at the time of writing this judgement.
Analysis 10. We find that the Claimant has adequately prosecuted his case and produced relevant documents to his case. These documents are contained in the Claimants List of Documents dated 22/8/2022.
11. The Claimant’s Letter of Withdrawal dated 8/8/2022 which is filed among other documents is clear and is acknowledged by the Respondent on 21/9/2022. It is observed that the Respondent has indicated a due date on this letter which is 22/2/2022.
12. On the other hand, we have observed that the Respondent has only filed a Defence dated 5/10/2023. The Defence has filed a respondent’s written submissions as directed by the court on 14/12/2023. We observe that the Respondent has not defended his case satisfactorily.
Conclusion 13. The Claimant has adequately prosecuted his case.The Defence has not defended this case satisfactorily.In view of the above highlighted facts, we pass judgement in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent and order: -a.Judgment is entered in favour of Claimant against Respondent for Kshs. 384,800/= plus cost and interest.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024. Hon. B. Kimemia Chairperson Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. Beatrice Sawe Member Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. Fridah Lotuiya Member Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. Philip Gichuki Member Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. Michael Chesikaw Member Signed 29. 8.2024Hon. Paul Aol Member Signed 29. 8.2024Tribunal Clerk JonahKinyua advocate holding brief for Gitonga Muriuki for the RespondentKipruto Advocate for the ClaimantKinyua advocate – We pray for 30 days stay of executionKipruto advocate – I object the Respondent have not been responding to any of the claims.Tribunal orders30 days stay of execution granted.Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 29. 8.2024