Oburu v Transcom Cooperative & Credit Society Limited [2025] KECPT 350 (KLR)
- Citation
- [2025] KECPT 350 (KLR)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Panel
- Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Case number
- Tribunal Case E006 of 2023
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Cooperative Tribunal
- Panel
- Janet Mwatsama, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw, PO Aol
- Case number
- Tribunal Case E006 of 2023
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had sufficiently proved his membership in the Respondent Sacco through documentary evidence, including pay slips reflecting deductions to the Sacco. The Respondent did not provide any substantive evidence to rebut the Claimant's membership or the amount claimed. The Tribunal held that the Respondent's proposal to pay in installments was not supported by a valid resolution and did not constitute a sufficient reason to delay the refund. The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant was entitled to a refund of Kshs. 252,050, plus costs and interest, as the Respondent failed to provide any lawful justification for withholding the funds. Claims for dividends and nominal damages were not proved and were dismissed.
Court disposition
Judgment for the Claimant.
Orders
- The Respondent shall refund the Claimant Kshs. 252,050.
- The Respondent shall pay costs and interest to the Claimant.
- Claims for dividends and nominal damages are dismissed.
02
Material facts
Parties
Chris Odhiambo Oburu
ApplicantTranscom Cooperative & Credit Society Limited
Respondent Counsel: Wakiaga AdvocateAmounts and remedies
- Share Contributions Refund Awarded: KES 252,050
03
Procedural history
Posture
Tribunal Claim / Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Claimant was a member of the Respondent Sacco.
- 02
Whether the Claimant is entitled to a refund of Kshs. 252,050 from the Respondent.
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Claimant argued that he was a member of the Respondent Sacco, evidenced by pay slips showing monthly deductions, and upon retirement in February 2020, he was entitled to a refund of his share contributions totaling Kshs. 252,050. He submitted a formal request for refund, which the Respondent ignored. He sought refund of contributions, accumulated funds, dividends due, nominal damages for loss of use, and costs.
- Respondent
- The Respondent denied the Claimant's membership and the amount claimed, but without prejudice, stated willingness to enter into a payment arrangement if any amount was owed, citing financial constraints and a policy of refunding Kshs. 100,000 per month on a first-come, first-served basis. The Respondent produced a resolution to defend the suit and correspondence with the Commissioner for Cooperative Development.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Section 27, Cooperative Societies Act (Cap 490) Laws of Kenya
A member of a cooperative society is entitled to a refund of their share contributions upon withdrawal or retirement, subject to the society's rules and the law.
- 02
Section 107, Evidence Act (Cap 80) Laws of Kenya
The burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish membership and entitlement to the claimed amount.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Tribunal found that the Claimant had sufficiently proved his membership in the Respondent Sacco through documentary evidence, including pay slips reflecting deductions to the Sacco. The Respondent did not provide any substantive evidence to rebut the Claimant's membership or the amount claimed. The Tribunal held that the Respondent's proposal to pay in installments was not supported by a valid resolution and did not constitute a sufficient reason to delay the refund. The Tribunal concluded that the Claimant was entitled to a refund of Kshs. 252,050, plus costs and interest, as the Respondent failed to provide any lawful justification for withholding the funds. Claims for dividends and nominal damages were not proved and were dismissed.
Obiter and limits
- A cooperative society must act promptly and transparently in processing member refunds to maintain trust and compliance with statutory obligations.
- Delays in refunding members' contributions without sufficient cause undermine the cooperative movement's credibility.
Court disposition
Judgment for the Claimant.
- The Respondent shall refund the Claimant Kshs. 252,050.
- The Respondent shall pay costs and interest to the Claimant.
- Claims for dividends and nominal damages are dismissed.
Source and reliance status
Cooperative Tribunal
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Cooperative Tribunal
Judgment
Oburu v Transcom Cooperative & Credit Society Limited (Tribunal Case E006 of 2023) [2025] KECPT 350 (KLR) (26 June 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 350 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
In the Cooperative Tribunal
Tribunal Case E006 of 2023
Janet Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members
June 26, 2025
Between
Chris Odhiambo Oburu
Claimant
and
Transcom Cooperative & Credit Society Limited
Respondent
Judgment
1. Matter for determination is Statement of Claim dated 22/2/2023 filled on 1/3/2022
2. The Claimant states he was a member of the Respondent Sacco member number 17022 making monthly share contributions and as at February 2020 when Claimant was retiring he had contributions worth kshs. 252,050/=.
3. On 24/2/2020 the Claimant wrote to Respondent for a refunds of the share contribution. Respondent has ignored and refused to refund the Claimant their money.
4. Claimant prayers is for:a.An order that the Respondent refunds the Claimant’s share contributions amounting to Kshs.252,050/= together with all accumulated funds.b.An order that the Respondent declares and pays the claimant all the dividends that are due to and entitled to the Claimant, since he became a member of the Respondent.c.Nominal damages for the loss of use of the moneys comprised in prayers (a) and (b) aboved.Costs of the suit.e.Any other relief that the Honourable court may deem fit and just to grant.Claimant filled List of documents dated 22/2/2023 on 1/3/2023 which documents included:a.Retirement letter dated 30th May, 2019b.Claimant’s pay slips for January and February, 2020c.The claimant ‘s letter dated 24th February, 2020d.Demand letter dated 15th February, 2023e.Any other with leave of court.
5. Respondent filled statement of Defence denying the Claimants Claim and that Claimant was their member and more so that Claimant had savings of kshs. 252,000/=. The Respondent further states that without prejudice indeed if Respondent owes Claimant any money they are willing to enter into a consensual payment arrangements as they have many other beneficiaries and have a tight schedule and only have a schedule of Kshs 100,000/= for refund per month which is to be paid on a first come first served basis. Respondent also filled List of Documents dated 24/4/2023 on 4/5/2025 which include:a.A copy of a resolution to defend this suit.b.A copy of a letter dated 8th March, 2023 addressed to the Commissioner for Cooperative Development.c.Any other necessary document with leave of court.
6. The matter being one of refund parties were directed to file and serve written submissions parties filed their written submissions with Claimant filing Written submissions dated 31. 1.2025 on 3. 2.2025 and Respondent as at the date of writing this judgment has not filed their written submissions.
7. The issue for determination is:Issue OneWhether Claimant is a member of Respondent Sacco?Issue TwoWhether the Claimant is entitled to refund of kshs. 252,050?
Issue One 8. Whether Claimant is a member of Respondent Sacco?
9. Claimant in evidence of his claim filled pay slips for the month of January and February 2020 which clearly indicate deductions made by his eye to the Respondent Sacco.
10. The Respondent have not disputed this claim by Claimant nor have they refused the same. This clearly shows that the Claimant was a member over a period of time. Respondents Defense is of some denials and has not shown any documents to counter the Claimants documents.
11. We find the Claimant was indeed member of Respondent Sacco.
Issue Two 12. Whether the Claimant is entitled to refund of kshs. 252,050?
13. The Claimant using the same documents pay slips which we shall refer to as Claimant Exhibit 2 shows a reflect the amount accumulated by Claimant over time the amount is clearly indicated.
14. Respondent avers indeed if the Claimant has the whole amount they pray to make payment over installments.
15. In the Defence they have produced a copy of Resolutions dated 27/9/2022 which is marked as R Exhibit 1 appointing the Respondent’s advocate and a letter to the Commissioner dated 8/3/2023 on many deposits to pay up kshs. 100,000 per month.
16. This is not a resolution neither can it be said to be acceptable.
17. The Respondent Sacco society is still a going concern and is not for a membership to delay their refunds further considering the Claimant withdrew way back in February 2020.
18. No sufficient reasons have been given if Claimant should not be refunded their savings.
Upshot 19. Having considered all the Judgment above is entered in favor of Claimant against Respondent for Kshs. 252,050/= plus costs and interest.
20. Prayer (b) and (c)not proved therefore-it fails.
JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 26TH DAY OF JUNE ,2025. HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 26. 6.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 26. 6.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 26. 6.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 26. 6.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 26. 6.2025HON. PAUL AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 26. 6.2025Tribunal Clerk A.GechikoWakiaga Advocate for the Respondent- PresentChris Odhiambo Oburu – None AppearanceHON. J. MWATSAMA – DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 26. 6.2025
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.