[2025] KECPT 316 (KLR)
The tribunal found that the respondent did not dispute the claimant's membership or the amount saved. The only defense raised was the AGM resolution suspending refunds and the existence of a pending judicial review. The tribunal held that the respondent's internal resolution could not override the claimant's...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 316 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: George Morara Machuka; Respondent: Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 2/E011 of 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Tribunal Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the claimant
- Judges
- Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Refunds, Share Withdrawal, Contractual Obligations
- 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
George Morara Machuka
Applicant
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent is obligated to refund the claimant his savings upon withdrawal from the Sacco.
- 2 Whether the respondent's AGM resolution to suspend refunds is a valid defense against the claimant's demand for refund.
- 3 Whether the existence of a pending judicial review case bars the tribunal from granting the refund.
Ratio Decidendi
The tribunal found that the respondent did not dispute the claimant's membership or the amount saved. The only defense raised was the AGM resolution suspending refunds and the existence of a pending judicial review. The tribunal held that the respondent's internal resolution could not override the claimant's statutory right to a refund upon withdrawal. The pending judicial review was not shown to have any direct bearing on the claimant's entitlement or to bar the tribunal from determining the matter. The evidence, including the withdrawal and demand letters, supported the claimant's case. Accordingly, judgment was entered for the claimant for the sum claimed, with costs and interest.
Court Disposition
judgment for the claimant
Orders
- The respondent shall pay the claimant Kshs. 120,000/=.
- The respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
22 paragraphs
Machuka v Metropolitan National Sacco Limited (Tribunal Case 2/E011 of 2024) [2025] KECPT 316 (KLR) (12 June 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 316 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 2/E011 of 2024
Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
June 12, 2025
Between
George Morara Machuka
Claimant
and
Metropolitan National Sacco Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. Matter for determination is statement of claim dated 12. 1.2024. he states that on 7. 6.2023 he withdraws from Respondent’s Sacco and sought to refund his shares. He claims to have savings of Kshs. 120,000/=. The Respondent have failed to refund and claimant prays for:a.The said sum of Kshs. 120,000/=b.Costs of the suit and interest until payment in full.c.Any other relief so deemed appropriate by this Honourable Tribunal.
2. The Claimant filed List of Documents dated 12. 1.2024 which includes :a.Withdrawal letterb.Demand letter from the Commissioner
3. The Respondent filed on 19. 3.2024 denying the averments of the Claimant. Further Respondent states there was a resolution of the Annual General Meeting to suspend all refunds to allow the Sacco achieve sound financial position.Respondents states Claimant’s claim lacks merit and that there is a Judicial Review case in the High Court pending hearing and determination.As such Claimant’s case needs to be dismissed.
4. Matter being one of refunds was directed to file written submissions.The Claimant’s filed their written submissions dated 10. 1.2025 filed on 6. 3.2025. The Respondent as of the date of writing this judgment had not filed their written submissions .
5. Matter is for refunds and it is a close and shut case.the Respondent in their Defence have not denied the Claimant was not their member neither Respondent have not denied they have the Claimant had saved Kshs.120,000/= with them.We have looked into the Claimant’s document as evidence that is letter to Respondent seeking for a refund.
6. Letter dated 31. 10. 2023 from the Commissioner for Cooperative Development to the County Director for Cooperative Kiambu seeking clarification why the Claimant has not been refunded.We also look into letter dated 7. 6.2023 from claimant to the Respondent where Claimant requests for his outstanding loan of Kshs.31,077/= be deducted from his deposits of Kshs.161,657/=.
7. With Respondent not denying the claim only that there are resolutions passed by Respondent in Annual General Meeting letter stops the respondent from payment to claimant as a refundUpshotJudgment is entered in favour of claimant against Respondent for Kshs. 120,000/= plus cost and interest.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025. HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025HON. P. AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 12. 6.2025Tribunal Clerk MutaiNo appearance by parties.Judgment delivered in absence of the parties.