Wambugu v Metropolitan National Sacco Society Limited [2025] KECPT 367 (KLR)

Wambugu v Metropolitan National Sacco Society Limited (Tribunal Case 191/E322 of 2024) [2025] KECPT 367 (KLR) (10 July 2025) (Judgment)

Neutral citation: [2025] KECPT 367 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the Cooperative Tribunal

Tribunal Case 191/E322 of 2024

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

July 10, 2025

Between

Susan Njeri Wambugu

Claimant

and

Metropolitan National Sacco Society Limited

Respondent

Judgment

1. Matter for determination is Statement of Claim dated 17/4/2024. The Claimant states she is member no. 46563 and consistently made deposits to the Respondent Sacco, which deposits stand at Kshs. 81,183. 91 at the time she was withdrawing in November, 2021. She claims the Respondent despite acknowledging the notice have failed to honor their obligation to refund the Claimant.The Claimant prayer is for;a.A judgement against the Respondent for refund of Claimant’s deposits of Kshs. 81,183. 91/= plus interest at court rates.b.Costs of the suitc.Interest in (a) above from the date of filing this suit.d.Any other relief that this Honourable tribunal may deem just and fit to grant.Claimant filed List of Documents dated 17/4/2024 which included:i.A copy of the withdrawal letter.ii.A copy of statement accounts

2. The Respondent filed Statement of Defence dated 25/7/2024 which the Respondent denied the Claimant’s averments and the Claimants has failed to disclose there was a resolution passed in an Annual General Meeting where it was agreed all refunds were suspended to allow the Sacco achieve sound financial position. As such, the resolution also binds the Claimant. The Respondent state the Claimant is yet to discharge the burden of guarantor ship.The Respondent prays for Claimant’s claim to be dismissed.Respondent filed List of Documents dated 13/11/2024, which documents included;i.Annual General Meeting resolutions stopping refundsii.Statement of Accountiii.Audited Accounts of Metropolitaniv.Affidavit of means.Respondent also filed Witness Statement.

3. The matter being one of refund, the same was to be dispensed off by way of Written Submissions which the Claimant filed Written Submissions dated 19/11/2024 and Respondent filed Written Submissions dated 13/11/2024. Having considered the pleadings, documents filed by both parties and Written Submissions, the matter for determination is;Issue One.Whether the Claimant has any liabilities.Issue TwoWhether the Claimant has proved her claim against the Respondent.Issue One.Whether the Claimant has any liabilities.Claimant avers the Respondent has her refund and has not paid. Respondent despite the denial of Claimant’s claim, state the Claimant had guaranteed someone a loan and thus cannot be refunded until she discharges her obligation. It is indeed true that when a member of a society has liability, they cannot receive a refund until their obligation is discharged.

4. The Respondent despite its allegation against the Claimant, have not provided any evidence or documents to confirm the assertions that Claimant was indeed a guarantor.The Respondents have not informed the Tribunal or tabled evidence of who the loan is, whether the loan is in default, and that indeed the Claimant is obligated.We therefore are not convinced as a tribunal that Claimant is a guarantor if at all and as such should be able to access her deposits.

5. Issue Two. Whether the Claimant has proved his claim against the Respondent?The Claimant as part of her Claim has filed her Statement of Accounts from the Respondent society which Statement of Account as at 31/8/2022 shows the Claimant had Kshs. 61,183. 91 as deposits.This document was not challenged by the Respondent and their claim that the Claimant cannot be refunded because of resolution passed to suspend the refunds is not convincing.The issue at the Tribunal is whether the Claimant is entitled to her refund which the Tribunal finds that the claimant is indeed entitled to her refund despite the resolution passed.Further, the resolution state the suspension is for two years which at the time of writing this judgement is now past.

Upshot.As such, we find merit in her claim and Judgement is entered in favor of the Claimant against the Respondent for Kshs. 61,183. 91/= plus cost and interest.

RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025. HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 10. 7.2025HON. BEATRICE SAWE - MEMBER SIGNED 10. 7.2025HON. FRIDAH LOTUIYA - MEMBER SIGNED 10. 7.2025HON. PHILIP GICHUKI - MEMBER SIGNED 10. 7.2025HON. MICHAEL CHESIKAW - MEMBER SIGNED 10. 7.2025HON. P. AOL - MEMBER SIGNED 10. 7.2025Tribunal Clerk KokiJudgment read in absence of the parties.HON. J. MWATSAMA - DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 10. 7.2025