[2025] KECPT 233 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the claimant had established her entitlement to a refund of Kshs 329,672.00 upon withdrawal from the respondent Sacco. The respondent's defence, based on an alleged AGM resolution to delay refunds, was unsupported by documentary evidence and amounted to mere denial. The Tribunal held that, in...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 233 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Alfred Anne Nankinyi; Respondent: Metropolitan Sacco Limited
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case 11.E020 of 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Refund Claim / Judgment
- Outcome
- judgment for the claimant
- Judges
- BM Kimemia, Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Legal Topics
- Sacco Member Refunds, Deposit Recovery, 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
Alfred Anne Nankinyi
Applicant
Metropolitan Sacco Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Refund Claim / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to a refund of Kshs 329,672.00 from the respondent upon withdrawal from membership.
- 2 Whether the respondent's reliance on AGM resolutions to delay refunds is valid in the absence of documentary evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the claimant had established her entitlement to a refund of Kshs 329,672.00 upon withdrawal from the respondent Sacco. The respondent's defence, based on an alleged AGM resolution to delay refunds, was unsupported by documentary evidence and amounted to mere denial. The Tribunal held that, in the absence of proof of such a resolution or any other lawful justification for withholding the refund, the claimant was entitled to judgment as prayed. The Tribunal therefore ordered the respondent to pay the claimed sum, with costs and interest at Tribunal rates from the date of filing the claim.
Court Disposition
judgment for the claimant
Orders
- The respondent shall pay the claimant Kshs 329,672.00.
- The respondent shall pay costs of the suit to the claimant.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
25 paragraphs
Nankinyi v Metropolitan Sacco Limited (Tribunal Case 11. E020 of 2023) [2025] KECPT 233 (KLR) (27 February 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 233 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case 11. E020 of 2023
BM Kimemia, Chair, Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
February 27, 2025
Between
Alfred Anne Nankinyi
Claimant
and
Metropolitan Sacco Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. Matter for determination is statement of claim dated 13th January 2023 filed on even date. The Claimant avers that on 20th April 2022 she wrote a letter to Respondent to withdraw from Respondent and sought a refund.
2. Claimant avers as at the time of the letter the Respondent had Kshs 329,672. 00 as deposits. Despite notice, the Respondent has not refunded the Claimant their savings.
3. The Claimant seeks for;a.The said sum of Kshs. 329,672. 00/=b.Costs of the suit and interest until payment in full.c.Any other relief so deemed appropriate by this Honourable Tribunal.
4. The Claimant also filed list of documents dated 13th January 2023 which had;a.Withdrawalb.Payslip
5. The Respondent filed a Statement of Defence dated 13th February 2023 filed on 16th February 2023.
6. They declined the Claimant’s claim as the same was not stamped. Further, the Respondent states as per 2012 AGM resolutions Members resolved to schedule refunds after 2 years due to liquidity challenges. The Respondent requested court to dismiss claim with costs.
7. Matter being one of refunds, the Tribunal directed the parties to file written submissions.
8. As at the time of writing this judgement none of the parties had filed their written submissions. As such, the claim is clear and documents produced allude to the same.
9. The Respondent however in their Defence consists of mere denials and not controvert the Claims claim. All they allude to is the Annual General Meeting of 2022 where there was a resolution passed which we do not have a copy of the same. Be that as it may, it does not own the document.
10. As such, we do not need further persuasion. We are inclined to enter judgement in favour of Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs 329,672/- plus costs and interest in the claim of Tribunal rates from the date of filing claim.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025. HON. B. KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 02. 2025HON. PAUL AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 27. 02. 2025Tribunal Clerk MutaiNo appearance by the parties.HON. B. KIMEMIA - CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 27. 02. 2025