Njaguara v Ngagi [2024] KECPT 1176 (KLR)

Njaguara v Ngagi (Tribunal Case E711/735 of 2022) [2024] KECPT 1176 (KLR) (25 July 2024) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2024] KECPT 1176 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Tribunal Case E711/735 of 2022

BM Kimemia, Chair, J. Mwatsama, Vice Chair, B Sawe, F Lotuiya, P. Gichuki, M Chesikaw & PO Aol, Members

July 25, 2024

Between

Peter Ngungi Njaguara

Claimant

and

Ann Wanja Ngagi

Respondent

Judgment

1. The matter for determination is a statement of claim dated June 29, 2022. In the Statement of Claim the Claimant claims that both he and the Respondent were members of Stima Sacco membership number 00xxx and 000xxx respectively. The Claimant avers that he guaranteed the Respondent two loans from Stima Sacco, which she defaulted and led the Claimant to be deducted money totaling to Ksh. 179,429/- . The claimant, therefore, prays for:a)Payment of Kshs.179,429/=b)Cost of the suit.c)Interest on (a),(b)d)Any other or further relief as the honourable court may deem fit and just to grant.The Claimant filed a witness statement and a List of Documents in support of her claim.

2. The Respondent filed a replying affidavit and a further replying affidavit as her response. In her response, the Respondent does not deny that she owes the Claimant the amount that was deducted to repay her debts. However, she contends that she has paid an amount to the Sacco for apportionment to her guarantors, and also that she had approached the Claimant and her family to allow her to repay in installments.

Analysis 3. The parties were ordered to reconcile their statements but they failed to do so. From the pleadings of the parties, the documents produced, and the evidence adduced during the hearing, the Tribunal notes that some part of the debt is disputed while some is not.

4. The Respondent acknowledges that the Claimant paid for her Ksh.179,729/-. However, she claims that she has repaid a sum of Ksh. 81,063/=. Therefore a sum of Ksh. Ksh.98,666/- is not disputed. The Respondent states that she has paid Ksh. 62,535/- through the cooperative society and Ksh. 7,253/- through mpesa. The Claimant denies this, and claims that the Respondent has only paid Ksh. 10,000/-. Fore the Mpesa amount, the Respondent has provided a statement for the period between 2017 and 2018. The Claimant opines that this was long before the amount even became due. We are inclined to believe the Claimant since the Respondent was terminated from employment in 2019, and it was only then that she started defaulting. There is evidence that the Respondent paid the Claimant Ksh. 11275/-. On the amount repaid through the Cooperative, the Tribunal can see that Ksh. 62,535. 40 was transferred to Acc. No. 80xxx which is associated with the Claimant. The parties were ordered to reconcile their statements, and it is on record that the Respondent wrore to the Claimants to reconcile the accounts but there was no response from the Claimants. We therefore give the Respondent the benefit of doubt that the money was paid to him. Therefore, the Respondent has repaid Ksh. 11,275, Ksh. 21630. 22 and Ksh. 40,905/- out of the total Ksh.179,429/-.

5. The upshot of the above is that we find merit in the Claimant’s claim. We order as follows:a.A refund of Kshs. 105,619/=.c.Costs of suit and interest from the date of filing suit at Tribunal rates.

JUDGMENTSIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2024. HON. B. KIMEMIA CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. BEATRICE SAWE MEMBER SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA MEMBER SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. PHILIP GICHUKI MEMBER SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW MEMBER SIGNED 25. 7.2024HON. PAUL AOL MEMBER SIGNED 25. 7.2024Tribunal Clerk JemimahMs. Makazi for ClaimantNo appearance for RespondentHON. B. KIMEMIA CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 25. 7.2024