Njoki v Metropolitan Sacco [2024] KECPT 895 (KLR)

Njoki v Metropolitan Sacco (Tribunal Case E181/135 of 2023) [2024] KECPT 895 (KLR) (Civ) (30 May 2024) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2024] KECPT 895 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Civil

Tribunal Case E181/135 of 2023

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

May 30, 2024

Between

Beth Njoki

Claimant

and

Metropolitan Sacco

Respondent

Judgment

Claimant’s Case 1. Claimant’s case is based on the Statement of Claim of 6. 3.2023, his Witness Statement dated 18. 8.2023 and his documents dated 6. 3.2023. He has also filed a Claimant written submission dated 18. 8.2023 in support of his case.At the onset, the court directed that being a refund issue the case will be dispensed through written submissions.

2. In her Statement of Claim the Claimant states she was a member of the Respondent member No. 9453 and contributed shares to the Respondent.She states that by April 2022 she issued a 60 days’ Notice to Withdraw from the Respondent with effect from 20. 6.2022. she states that she was claiming Kshs.526,590/= by 20. 4.2022, which the Respondent has neglected. Additionally, as to her Statement of Claim, she is claiming interest at commercial rates of 14% from 20. 4.2022 until date of judgment.The Claimant has filed the following documents.

3. In support of her claim.a.Claimant Letter of 20. 4.2022 to Respondent to stop deductions.b.Claimants Letter of 20. 4.2022 to Respondent asking for her dividends for the year 2022. c.Demand Notice dated 1. 2.2023. in her written submissions the claimant reiterates that she was a member of the Respondent and now claims Kshs. 526,960/= as shares and dividends for the year 2022. She confirms that she complied to all requirements guiding share refunds. She contends that the respondent does not deny the claim neither the 60 days’ notice to withdraw from the Sacco. The Claimant submits that she has proved her case and therefore prays for the orders sought in her claim.

Respondent’s Case 4. Respondent’s case is based on Respondent’s Statement of Defence dated 28. 3.2023 and the Respondent’s written submission dated 10. 11. 2023. In their Statement of Defence, the respondent confirms that the Claimant was their member number 9453 and holding Account 0000246286. The Respondent denies receiving the 60 days’ notice from the Claimant. They also denied the claim on dividends as claimed.The Respondent denies that they have neglected to pay the Claimant.

5. The Respondent states that they came to be aware of the Demand Notice from the court records. The Respondent states that the Claimant was bound by the Respondent 2019 Annual General Meeting resolutions where it was resolved to schedule refunds on a first come, first serve basis.

6. The impact of this resolution was that the Claimant’s case would be put in the refund roster.The Respondent further cites the 2022 Annual General Meeting resolutions where it was resolved that refunds wait for 2 years due to the liquidity challenges facing the Respondent .The Respondent states that the Claimant’s claim will be put in abeyance as per 2022 Annual General Meeting resolutions. The Respondent states that the Claimant is bound by the 2022 Annual General Meeting Resolutions.

Analysis 7. The Claimant has adequately prosecuted her case through filing relevant documents and her Statement of Claim. In her written submissions the Claimant has proved that she issued the requisite Notice of Withdrawal to the Respondent.She has also adequately her case to prove that she is entitled to her claim as per her Statement of Claim.The Respondent has not denied that the Claimant was its member. As regards the withdrawal of the Claimant the Respondent denies receiving such notice but agrees that the Claimant was its member and contributor.

8. The Respondent did not file any evidence to counter the Claimant documents produced in court to support the Claimant’s case.The Respondent did not produce any evidence of the mentioned resolutions of 2019 and 2022 general resolutions.It is our position that the Claimant has adequately prosecuted her case by providing evidence to show she was indeed a member and a contributor of the Respondent.She has also adduced evidence that she met the requisite conditions to withdraw from the Respondent.The Respondent has merely denied the claim and also failed to file evidence to support their denial.

9. We therefore pass judgment in favour of the Claimant against the Respondent for :a.The sum of Kshs. 526,590/=b.Cost and Interest at court rates.

JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2024. Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 30. 5.2024Hon. Beatrice Sawe Member Signed 30. 5.2024Hon. Fridah Lotuiya Member Signed 30. 5.2024Hon. Philip Gichuki Member Signed 30. 5.2024Hon. Michael Chesikaw Member Signed 30. 5.2024Hon. Paul Aol Member Signed 30. 5.2024Tribunal Clerk JonahKanyoro advocate for the ClaimantKorir advocate for the RespondentKorir advocate – We pray for 30 days stay of execution.Kanyoro advocate- No objection.Tribunal order:30 days stay of execution granted.HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 30. 5.2024