Andrew Githinji Mwihuri & another v Taifa Sacco Society Limited [2021] KECPT 273 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL AT NAIROBI

TRIBUNAL CASE NO.179 OF 2020

ANDREW  GITHINJI  MWIHURI  &  ANOTHER .........CLAIMANT

VERSUS

TAIFA  SACCO  SOCIETY  LIMITED..........................RESPONDENT

RULING

1.   The Application coming  for determination  is dated  30. 9.2020 by the  Applicant  seeking  for Orders:

a.  That the  Application   be  heard  exparte  in the first  instance  in  view  of  its urgency.

b. That  the Application  is brought  under the public  interest  who owned  NDCU from  Mukurweini, Mathira, Tetu and Kieni.

c. May the court  do order  TAIFA SACCO   as an illegal  Co-operative  Society  as it was  illegally  registered  by criminals.

d. The court  do issue an order  that all the banks  operating under the registration of TAIFA SACCO  LIMITED be put under the Central Bank Deposit  Protection  Fund  Board  Management  until  the final  determination  of this case?

e. That  the court  to order  the deposit  protection  and to facilitate  the court  with the  total  amount  and assets  which are  in  the hand  of TAIFA  SACCO  for the  interest  of the public  and all the  members  of NDCU.

f.   That the  costs  of  this Application  be costs  in the cause

2.  The same  is premised  on the grounds  on the face  of the Application  to  wit:

a. The transfer  of Nyeri  District  Co-operative  Union  Limited  whilst belonging  to Nyeri  Coffee Farmers and Nyeri  Dairy  Co-operatives Societies was illegally  transferred  by Nyeri  Cartels  to their  new illegal  Co-operatives  Society.

b. There  was  no Annual General  Meeting  in all the  Co-operatives  Societies  called  to seek mandate for  the newly  formed  Societies.

c. There are  36  branches  of  banking  through  the illegal  registration  in major  towns in the Country.

d. The court  to issue  an injunction  to Taifa  sacco and Green  Bells  Auctioneers against  any attachment  of machines and investment of Rumukia Co-operative  society  in Mukurweini until Application  is determined  by court.

e. Did  the Minister  of Co-operatives  act  as per the Co-operative Act  by  transferring  union  assets  to a Co-operative Society.

3.  The Application  is supported  by the Affidavit  of Andrew  Githinji Mwihuri stating  he is a  member  of Nyeri  District  Co-operative  Society(NDCS) which  is a collagomurate of Tetu  Coffee Co-operative  Society, Othaya Coffee Co-operative  Society,  Mukurweini Coffee  Co-operative  Society, Kieni  Dairy  Co-operative  Society and Tetu  Dairy  Co-operative  Society.

That  the NDCU officials  who were in office in  1999 registered  an illegal  Co-operative Society and transferred  unknown  amount  of money  to their  accounts as per annexed  documents  marked  AGM.

That no money was recorded in the Agreement.  The Applicant  requests  for Taifa  Sacco  Limited  the Respondent  herein  for their  registration  as illegal  and for  the Commissioner for Co-operative  to reinstate  the NDCU Registration  No.  1418.

4.  The Respondents filed responses in opposition of the Applications.

The  1st  Respondent  filed  a Replying  Affidavit  dated  21. 12. 20 sworn  by Samuel  Ngugi  the 1st  Respondent  Chief  Executive  Officer and stated the  1st Respondent  emanated  from Nyeri  District  Co-operative  Union Limited  which  was a  Co-operative  Union  duly  registered  under Co-operative  Societies  Act.

That  in 1999 the NDCU assets and liabilities  were taken  over  by Nyeri  Farmers  Savings  and Credit  Co-operative  Society  Limited which  subsequently  changed  its name  to Taifa  Co-operative  Savings  and Credit  Society  Limited  the 1st  Respondent  herein.

He averred the Application  is frivolous, vexatious  with no basis  in law.  That the  1st Respondent  is properly  registered  by  Commissioner  of Co-operatives  after  all  due  procedures  as  per the  Co-operative  Societies  Act  were  followed.

He further  went on to state  great prejudice  would  be  suffered  by  1st  Respondent  and its activities were  the  court to grant  the Applicant’s prayers.

The  2nd Respondent  has  been wrongly  joined  as party  to the suit.

He further  stated  the Application  is coming  too late  in the day  22 years  later  after  the  1st Respondent  predecessor  has been  in existence  since  1998.

The 1st  Respondent  further  filed  Grounds  of Opposition  dated  9. 11. 2020 filed  on  12. 11. 2020.

The  Applicant  filed a further Affidavit  in response  to the  Respondent  Replying  Affidavit  and  Grounds  of Opposition  and further  stated  and or  re-iterated  that:

a. Taifa Sacco  society  limited  is illegal  and its  registration  ought  to be cancelled.

b. Commissioner  of Co-operatives  reinstate  registration  Act  of  NDCU Limited.

c. Registration  Certificates  of Mutheka and  Aguthi  Co-operatives be cancelled.

d. That  all banking Account  of Taifa Sacco, Aguthi and Mutheka be suspended.

5. Parties  were directed to file  written submissions  on  30. 9.2020 and Applicant  filed their  submissions  dated  10. 11. 2020on even  date.

The Respondents  filed their  submissions  dated  1. 3.2021 on 3. 3.2021.

Analysis

The Applicants  seeks  for revocation of  1st Respondent  registration  Certificate  and have  the NDCU  Certificate  re-instated.

As pointed  out  by the  Respondents  the Applicant  is coming  to court well  over 20 years  later.

At the  point when  the  take over  was done  the Applicant  ought  to  have  moved  the Commissioner  to conduct  an inquiry  and  if unsatisfied  make an appeal.

The  issue  for determination  is  therefore  one:

Issue one:

Whether  the Tribunal  can cancel  and  or recall  the certificate  of the 1st Respondent.

The procedure  for deregistration  of Co-operatives  is outlined  in Section  61  Co-operative  Societies  Act  states:

1. “If the Commissioner, after  holding an inquiry  under Section  58  or making  an inspection  under Section  59  of this Act,  or receiving  an Application  made  by at  least  three fourths  of the members  of a Co-operative  Society,  is of the opinion  that  the Society  ought  to be dissolved, he  may,  in writing,  order  the dissolution  of the  Society  and subsequent  cancellation  of registration.

2.  Any  member  of  a Co-operative  Society  who feels  aggrieved  by an Order  under sub Section  (1) may,  within  two months  after the  making of such  Order,  Appeal  against  the Order  to the Minister  with a final  Appeal  to the High  Court.

3.  Where  no Appeal  is  filed within the  prescribed time, the Order  shall  take  effect  on the expiry  of that period,  but where  an Appeal  is filed  within  the  prescribed  time the  Order shall  not take effect  unless  it is confirmed  by the  Minister  or by the High court, as the  case may be.

4.  Where  the Commissioner  makes an Order under Subsection (1) he shall  make such  further  order  as he thinks  fit for the  custody  of the books  and documents  and the protection  of the assets  of  the Society.

5.  No  Co-operative  Society  shall be  dissolved  or wound up save by an Order of the Commissioner.”

Section  62  of Co-operative  Societies  Act  states:

1.  “ Where  a Co-operative  Society has-

a. Less  than the  prescribed  number  of members; or

b. Failed  to file returns  with the Commissioner  for a period  of three  years; or

c. Failed  to achieve  its objects,

The  Commissioner may, in writing , order  the cancellation  of its registration  and  dissolution  of the Society  and the  order shall  take effect  immediately.

2.  A person  aggrieved  by an order  of the Commissioner  under sub Section  (1) may Appeal  against  such order  to the Minister  within  thirty  days  of  the Order.”

6.  All  this  vests  in the Commissioner  of Co-operatives. Once  the Applicant  has  followed  due process  only  then can  they be seen   to seek  further  Orders  or Appeal  the decisions  of the Commissioner  of Co-operatives.

One  would  thus wonder  why  the Applicant  has taken  this long  to  address  his  dissatisfaction  if any.  The 1st Respondent  has been  in operation  since  30th  May  2006 when they  were issued  with a  certificate  of  change of name.

7.  We take  note the Applicant  has filed  several  suits  regarding  different issues against the Respondents. The current  Application  could be  said  to have  no basis  in law  for  seeking  Orders  which  the Tribunal  cannot grant  as  the law  has laid  down  procedures  on the Orders  the Applicant  seeks  for.

The Tribunal  should not  be used as  a back  door to issue  illegal  orders  or settle  scores.

8.  To this end  we find  the Application  dated  30. 9.2020 lacks  merit  and dismiss  the same  with costs  to the Respondent.

Ruling signed, dated and delivered virtually  at Nairobi this 15thday of July, 2021.

Hon. B. Kimemia                  Chairperson                Signed       15. 7.2021

Hon. J. Mwatsama              Deputy Chairperson  Signed       15. 7.2021

Mr. Gitonga Kamiti              Member                       Signed       15. 7.2021

Tribunal Clerk                       C. Maina

Odhiambo  for the Respondents

Andrew  Githinji – no appearance.

Hon. J. Mwatsama              Deputy Chairperson  Signed       15. 7.2021