Obam v Mater Sacco [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR)

Obam v Mater Sacco (Tribunal Case 536 of 2017) [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR) (31 August 2023) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2023] KECPT 777 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Tribunal Case 536 of 2017

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

August 31, 2023

Between

Fransisca Obam

Claimant

and

Mater Sacco

Respondent

Ruling

1. The Application is brought vide a Notice of Motion dated 15/10/2021 and filed on 22/11/2021 under Certificate of Urgency dated 15/10/2021 filed on 22/11/2021. The Applicant sought the following orders;i.Spent.ii.that the honourable tribunal be pleased to order for stay of execution against the applicant by the 2nd respondent pending the hearing and determination of the application.iii.that the applicant be granted leave to settle the decretal amount of kshs. 354,039. 58 in installments until payment in full.iv.that the cost of this Application be in the cause.

2. The Applicant avers that the 1st Respondent has issued the Applicant with a proclamation notice that expires on 15/10/21. The Applicant avers that attempts were made to engage the Judgement Debtor for a payment proposal with an aim to agree on an instalment payment plan until full payment.

3. The Respondent/Claimant avers that he is not opposed to the Claimant/Respondent’s but have not stated the amount to pay in installments. Further, the Claimant/Respondent proposed to pay a down payment of Kshs. 200,000/= and the balance together with the costs and interests Kshs. 50,000/= annually until payment in full.

Analysis and Determination. 4. Parties were ordered to file Written Submissions but only the Respondent/Claimant filed theirs.

5. It should be noted that the Applicant/Respondent failed to prosecute their matter, in Thaithini Development Company Limited v Mombasa Water & Sewerage Company and Another [2002] eKLR the court held that the legal substratum for dismissal of suits for want of prosecution is founded on the principle that litigation must be expedited and concluded by parties who come to court for seeking justice. There should be no delay at all and based on legal maxims, Justice delayed is Justice denied.

6. Further the Respondent/Claimant should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of the judgement found in their favor. After filing and service of the Notice of Motion, the Applicant/Respondent did not take any steps to prosecute the Notice of Motion, nor did the Applicant/Respondent offer any payment proposal.We therefore find that the Application lacks merit.

Upshot. 7. From the foregoing, we find that the Application lacks merit and is therefore dismissed with costs.

RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023. Hon. Beatrice Kimemia Chairperson Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Beatrice Sawe Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Fridah Lotuiya Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Philip Gichuki Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Michael Chesikaw Member Signed 31. 8.2023Hon. Paul Aol Member Signed 31. 8.2023Tribunal Clerk JemimahHon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 31. 8.20