Kingara v Ikandi [2022] KEBPRT 223 (KLR)

Kingara v Ikandi (Tribunal Case Miscellaneous E254 of 2022) [2022] KEBPRT 223 (KLR) (Civ) (15 July 2022) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEBPRT 223 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Business Premises Rent Tribunal

Civil

Tribunal Case Miscellaneous E254 of 2022

P May, Vice Chair

July 15, 2022

Between

Paul Kingara

Applicant

and

Mary Mumo Ikandi

Respondent

Ruling

1. The tenant filed the application dated March 16, 2022 seeking a plethora of orders against the landlord . The tenant sought orders of temporary injunction against the landlord. The application is premised on the grounds set out on the face of the application and in the supporting affidavit sworn on even date.

2. The tenant asserts that the landlord has disconnected power supply thus frustrating him as he carries out his business operations.

3. The application has been opposed vide the replying affidavit deponed to by the respondent on April 12, 2022.

4. The landlord states that the tenant has refused to vacate the demised premises despite the lease having expired. She maintains that the tenant has defaulted in meeting his contractual obligation and is using the present application as shield and sword of continuing with such illegalities.

5. The parties elected to canvass the application by way of written submissions. There has been compliance. I have considered the application, the response and the submissions on record and will proceed as follows:

6. The submissions filed are brief. It tells of the nature of the dispute between the parties herein . The tenant has mentioned that he had previously filed other applications before the Honourable Tribunal which were decided in his favour.

7. The sole issue for determination is whether the application has merit. The main prayer sought by the applicant is an order for reconnection of the power supply. The landlord has denied ever disconnecting electricity. I have seen a demand letter that was done by the applicant through their advocates protesting the said disconnection.

8. It is prudent to note that the Tribunal issued orders on the March 17, 2022 . The effect of the said orders was that the landlord was ordered to reconnect power. I believe the said order was complied with as the tenant did not raise any issue of non- compliance thereafter. The issue seems to have been overtaken by events save to mention that parties should at all times act within the purview of the law.

9. The tenant made a prayer for suspension of rent. This prayer was premised on the ground that the power disconnection tampered with the tenant’s business.

10. This Tribunal draws its powers from section 12 of cap 301and indeed has the power to make such orders in protecting the tenants as required under the Preamble of the Act. The power must be exercised capriciously taking into concern the competing commercial interests between the parties.

11. It is trite that the landlord has a right to enjoy the fruits of her investment. Any order for the suspension of rent must also be weighed against the provisions of article 40 of the Constitution.

12. In the premises, I decline to grant the said prayer.

13. Before penning off, I would advise the parties to take advantage of the Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms available to them as envisaged under article 159 of the constitution. They should also strive to act within the full purview of the law.

14. It is imperative to note that this ruling has conclusively dealt with the reference. The parties are remined that they must at all times meet their contractual obligations as when they fall due. Any adverse actions such as termination of tenancy must also be carried out within the prescribed procedure stipulated under Cap 301.

15. The upshot is that the application dated March 16, 2022 is dismissed with no orders as to costs.It is so ordered.

RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED THIS 15TH DAY OF JULY 2022. HON. P. MAYVICE CHAIRBUSINESS PREMISES RENT TRIBUNALRuling delivered in the absence of the parties.