David Ndichu Kamatu, Stephen Njoroge, John Kabiru Njoroge, Bernard Gitau, Charles Kamau, Mukungugu Women Group, Mwireri Self Help Group v Liquidator [2021] KECPT 490 (KLR)

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL AT NAIROBI

TRIBUNAL  CASE NO.370 OF 2020

DAVID  NDICHU KAMATU..................................................................1ST CLAIMANT

STEPHEN  NJOROGE..........................................................................2ND CLAIMANT

JOHN  KABIRU NJOROGE..................................................................3RD CLAIMANT

BERNARD  GITAU................................................................................4TH CLAIMANT

CHARLES  KAMAU .............................................................................5TH CLAIMANT

MUKUNGUGU WOMEN GROUP......................................................6TH CLAIMANT

MWIRERI SELF  HELP  GROUP......................................................7TH CLAIMANT

VERSUS

THE LIQUIDATOR................................................................................ RESPONDENT

RULING

This  is our Ruling  on the Respondent’s  Notice  of Preliminary  Objection dated  2. 2.2020.  Vide the said  Preliminary  Objection,  the Respondent  want the Claimant’s Application  dated  30. 9.18 and the entire  claim  be dismissed  for the following  reasons:

a. That  the Tribunal  does not have the  requisite  jurisdiction  to entertain  the claim,

b. That the claim  is time-barred.

Vide the  directions  given on  5. 2.2020,  the Preliminary  Objection  was  canvassed  by  way of  written submissions. The  Claimants filed  their submissions  on  15. 6.2020while  the Respondent  did so  on 27. 11. 2020.

Respondent’s  Submissions

Vide his  submissions  filed  on 27. 1.2020,  the Respondent  has challenge  this Tribunal’s  jurisdiction  to entertain  the claim  on account of the fact that  the issues  raised  therein  relate  to  cancellation  of title.  That it  is only the Environment and Land  Court  which  has  the requisite  jurisdiction  to do so.  He cited the provisions of Section 13 (1)of the Environment  and Land Court  Act and  Section  80  of   the Land Registration  Actto buttress  the Argument.

He also  cited  the holding  of the court  in the case of  Republic –vs-  Gathaite Farmers’ Co-operative  Society Limited  & another  Ex parte Richard  Ng’anga Kamiro[2013] eKLR.

That having  regard  to the pleadings  in the claim,  the Respondent  is persuaded  that the claim  herein  is not  one envisaged  by Section  76  of the Co-operative  Societies,  Act  (Cap  490) Laws of Kenya.

Claimant’s  Submissions

Vide the  submissions  filed on  15. 6.2020,  the Claimant  has opposed  the Preliminary Objection  as follows.

Jurisdiction

On  this issue,  the Claimants contend that the Tribunal  has jurisdiction  to  entertain  the claim  on the ground  that  the dispute  emanates  from the management  and organization  of Mukangu  Farmers’  Co-operative Society. That  as a consequence, any dispute arising  therefrom  is governed  by the provisions  of Section  76 of the  Co-operative  Societies  Act.  They  also  cited  the decision  of the  court in the case of  Republic  - vs- Co-operative  Tribunals and  2 others  exparte Jackson  Wekesa Abala[2019] eKLR.

The Claimants contend  that they are  members  of Mukangu  Farmers’ Co-operative  Society Limited.  That  this as members, they purchased  property from the  Co-operative  Society but  have not  been issued  with title  deeds  as promised. That  their  demand is  for issuance  of the title deeds or refund  of  current market  value.  That the issue in dispute  is thus not whether  they are entitled  to land but rather  whether  Respondent  has discharged  its obligation  towards  them.

Limitation  of Actions

On this  issue the Claimants  contend that  the cause  of  action  arose in the year , 2016 and is  thus  within  the time limited  to originate  the claim.

Issues  for determination

The Respondents Preliminary Objection  dated  2. 2.2020 has presented  the following  issues  for determination.

a. Whether  the Tribunal  lacks  jurisdiction  to entertain the claim.

b. Whether  the claim  is time barred.

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction  is everything.  Without  it,  a court downs  its tools. This was  the  holding  of  the court  of Appeal  in the case  of  Peter Gichuki  King’ara – vs-  IEBC & 2 others, Civil  Appeal  (Nyeri) No. 23/13.

In the present  Preliminary Objection, the  Respondent  contends  that the  Tribunal  does not  have jurisdiction  to entertain  the claim since  the matter  relates  to cancellation  of title  to land.  That  it is  only  the Environment and land  court  which is  divested with  the said  jurisdiction.

On the converse  the Claimants contend  that the matter  before   the Tribunal  relates  to the business  of Makangu Co-operative  Societyand is thus  within the ambit  of  the provisions  of Section  76  of the Co-operative  Societies  Act.

As was held  by the court and  the case of  Charles  Keragita  Arwenya-  vs- Nyakoe  Farmers’  Co-operative  Society Limited [2010]eKLR,

“ Section  76 of  the Co-operative  Societies  Act provides  that any  dispute  concerning  the business of a Co-operative  Society and arising  among  members  of the Society or between  members  and the Society or its committee or any  officer  of the society shall be  referred  to the Co-operative  Tribunal under section  81(II) of  the Act  by any party  aggrieved  by the Order.”

We have  perused the statement  of claim  dated  6. 8.2018. It  is  apparent  that the  Claimants are  members  of Mukungugu Farmers’  Co-operative  Society. That  vide  the  said  membership, they  purchased  land from  the society. That  they made  the requisite payments  and took possession  of their  respective  plots.  That before  being  issued with title  documents,  the society  was put  and/or  placed  under liquidation. That since  then,  the liquidator has refused  and/or declined  to issue  the  said titles. That  the claim is  therefore brought  against  the liquidator  to process  the said  titles.

We have  contrasted  the Claimants arguments  in the claim  vis-à-vis those raised by the Respondent in the current Preliminary  Objection. Whilst  we acknowledge  that the ELC Court  is the only  court  with jurisdiction  to make a determination  on cancellations  or revocation  of title, we note that  the matters  raised  in the instant  claim  does not  relate  to cancellation  or revocation  of title.  It is a matter  relating  to the business of the society in that the Claimants are seeking  to compel  the Respondent  to complete  the process  of transfer  of plots  sold  by the society  to them. This  is  the business  of the Tribunal  as envisaged by Section  76  of Co-operative Societies  Act.  We thus  disagree  with the Respondent  that we do  not have jurisdiction  to entertain the claim.  We do have  it.

Limitation  of Actions

Whilst  the Respondent  raised  the issue vide  his  Preliminary  Objection, it did  not  say much about  it in his written  submissions. Whilst  the Claimants have responded  to it, we deem it unnecessary  to delve into  it  in the absence  of extrapolation by  the Respondent.

Conclusion

The upshot of the foregoing  is that we  do not find  merit  in the Respondent’s  Notice  of  Preliminary  Objection  dated  2. 2.2020 and hereby  dismiss  it  with no Orders  as to costs.

Ruling signed, dated and delivered virtually this 25th day of  March,  2021.

Hon. B. Kimemia         Chairperson             Signed      25. 3.2021

Hon. J. Mwatsama    Deputy Chairperson  Signed      25. 3.2021

B. Akusala             Member                       Signed      25. 3.2021

No appearance  for parties

Hon. B. Kimemia          Chairperson                Signed      25. 3.2021