[2025] KECPT 182 (KLR)
The tribunal found that the claimant had proved her case beyond any reasonable doubt by producing documentary evidence, including payslips, withdrawal letters, and correspondence from the respondent and their advocate, all of which acknowledged the claimant's membership, withdrawal, and the amount owed. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 182 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Jane Wanjiku Mabuu; Respondent: National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 729/E775 of 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- claim allowed in part
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Withdrawal, Refund of Deposits, Burden of Proof, Documentary Evidence
- 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
Jane Wanjiku Mabuu
Applicant
National Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a refund of her deposits from the respondent upon withdrawal from membership.
- 2 Whether the respondent is liable to pay interest and costs as claimed by the claimant.
Ratio Decidendi
The tribunal found that the claimant had proved her case beyond any reasonable doubt by producing documentary evidence, including payslips, withdrawal letters, and correspondence from the respondent and their advocate, all of which acknowledged the claimant's membership, withdrawal, and the amount owed. The respondent failed to produce any evidence to contradict the claimant's case or challenge the authenticity of the documents. The tribunal was satisfied that the claimant was entitled to a refund of her deposits. However, the tribunal found no evidence to support the claim of unjust enrichment or that the respondent lent out the claimant's shares at 14% interest. Accordingly, the...
Court Disposition
claim allowed in part
Orders
- A refund of Kshs. 277,500 to the claimant.
- Costs of the suit to the claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Mabuu v Natioanl Hospital Insurance Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 729/E775 of 2022) [2025] KECPT 182 (KLR) (27 February 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 182 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 729/E775 of 2022
BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
February 27, 2025
Between
Jane Wanjiku Mabuu
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 01060 and she formally withdrew from the Respondent on 28th May 2021 and her withdrawal was approved on 22nd July 2021, and she had accumulated Ksh. 298,000/= 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. 277,500/= together with interest at the rate of 14 per annum from 22nd July 2021 aforesaid until payment thereof.b.Costs of the suit with interest at court rates.c.Such further and/or other further relief this Honourable 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 July 2021. The same month that the Claimant claims she withdrew from the Respondent. The balance indicated under NHIF Sacco in the payslip amounts Ksh. 298,000/-. The letter from the Respondent dated 22nd July 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. 277,500/=.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