[2021] KEBPRT 92 (KLR)
The Tribunal found that the applicant had already vacated the premises on her own volition and removed her goods prior to moving the Tribunal. There was no evidence of forceful eviction, as confirmed by police investigations and correspondence. Since the landlord/tenant relationship had ceased to exist at the time...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2021] KEBPRT 92 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Penninah Mworia; Respondent: Mohammud Jama
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Tribunal Case E419 of 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Restoration and Damages After Alleged Forceful Eviction
- Outcome
- Application and reference dismissed with costs to the landlord.
- Legal Topics
- Controlled Tenancy, Jurisdiction of Tribunal, Forceful Eviction, Landlord Tenant Relationship
- 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
Penninah Mworia
Applicant
Mohammud Jama
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Application / Ruling on Application for Restoration and Damages After Alleged Forceful Eviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to deal with the matter in the absence of a subsisting landlord/tenant relationship.
- 2 Whether the applicant was a tenant at the time of filing the suit.
- 3 Whether the applicant was forcefully evicted by the respondent.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the applicant had already vacated the premises on her own volition and removed her goods prior to moving the Tribunal. There was no evidence of forceful eviction, as confirmed by police investigations and correspondence. Since the landlord/tenant relationship had ceased to exist at the time of filing, the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the reference or grant the orders sought. The Tribunal therefore dismissed both the reference and the application, with costs awarded to the landlord.
Court Disposition
Application and reference dismissed with costs to the landlord.
Orders
- The reference and application are dismissed with costs to the landlord.
- The tenant is at liberty to pick any other items still in the possession of the landlord.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
27 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL
AT NAIROBI
TRIBUNAL CASE NO. E419 OF 2021 (NAIROBI)
PENNINAH MWORIA.............APPLICANT/TENANT
-VERSUS-
MOHAMMUD JAMA....LANDLORD RESPONDENT
RULING
The Background of the Dispute
1. The Applicant moved this court on the 13th of August 2021 under certificate of urgency seeking orders that the Tribunal does restore the applicant in the business premises and order that the Respondent repairs all the damages arising from a forceful eviction and not to interfere in any with the Applicant’s peaceful possession. In the alternative, the Respondent does pay Kshs 80,000/- being payment in lieu of notice and Kshs 700,000/- being refund of goodwill paid and a further Kshs 280,000/-.
2. The Respondent filed a replying affidavit sworn on 7th September 2021 and in response stated that the applicant left the premise on her own in August 2021 with rent arrears of 4 months. Her stock was moved by one of her employees to a shop nearby and therefore there exists no Landlord/Tenant relationship. The Landlord has attached a letter from the ODPP absolving her from shop breaking.
3. The Landlord filed submissions to the effect that there is no longer any Landlord Tenant relationship and this Tribunal as this is confirmed by the Tenant and therefore the reference and application ought to be struck off.
4. The Tenant also submitted on 3 issues, whether the Applicant was a Tenant at the time of filing this suit? whether the tenancy is controlled? and whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the matter?
Issues for Determination
5. Having considered the parties’ pleadings, affidavits and submissions and having considered the relevant legal framework, the following is the main issue that fall for determination before this Honourable Court:
Whether the Tribunal has the jurisdiction to deal with this matter?
6. From the documents before this Tribunal it is clear that indeed there was a Landlord/Tenant relationship which came to an abrupt end. The Landlord claims the Tenant was in arrears for 4 months and upon being requested to pay for the arrears she choose to move out it is not clear how this was done as no auctioneer’s proclamation has been attached and or demand letter by either party.
7. The Tenant claims she was forcefully evicted by the Landlord who took her goods and even reported the same to the police and attaches abstract and statement. This averment has been countered by a letter from the police stating there was no evidence of forceful eviction and subsequently no enough evidence to charge the Landlord for shop breaking on a balance of probabilities the Landlords averments appear more credible.
8. That said the Tribunal cannot close its eyes on the fact that the Tenant moved this court when she had moved out of the premises on her own volition and even took her goods away thus there existed no Landlord/Tenant relationship. This Tribunal must therefore do the right thing down its tools and dismiss both the reference and the application with costs to the Landlord.
9. Tenant at liberty to pick any other items still in the possession of the Landlord.
HON A. MUMA
VICE CHAIR
BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL
Ruling dated, signed and delivered virtually by Hon A. Muma this 20thday ofDecember, 2021 in the presence of Bukachifor the Applicant and in the absence of the Respondent.
HON A. MUMA
VICE CHAIR
BUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNAL