Case ID:176267

Ernest Adenyo Ajiki v Taraji Sacco Society Limited [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Tribunal Case 443 of 2019

Parties:

Ernest Adenyo Ajiki v Taraji Sacco Society Limited

Date Delivered:

04 Mar 2021

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

Cooperative Tribunal

Case Action:

Judgment

Judge(s):

Hon. B. Kimemia - Chairperson, Hon. J. Mwatsama - Deputy Chairperson & B. Akusala - Member

Citation:

Ernest Adenyo Ajiki v Taraji Sacco Society Limited [2021] eKLR

Court Division:

Tribunal

County:

Nairobi

Case Outcome:

Judgment entered against the Respondent

Disclaimer:

The information contained in the above segment is not part of the judicial opinion delivered by the Court. The metadata has been prepared by Kenya Law as a guide in understanding the subject of the judicial opinion. Kenya Law makes no warranties as to the comprehensiveness or accuracy of the information

REPUBLIC OF KENYA

IN THE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL AT NAIROBI

TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 443 OF 2019

ERNEST ADENYO AJIKI.....................................................CLAIMANT

VERSUS

TARAJI SACCO SOCIETY LIMITED.........................RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

Vide the Statement dated

19.2.19

filed on

15.8.2019

, the Claimant has moved this Tribunal seeking for Judgment to be entered against the Respondent as follows:

a. Kshs.415,850/= being unpaid share contribution together with interest at court rates;

b. Costs.

The reliefs are based on the fact that despite having issued a formal Notice of withdrawal the Respondent has refused and/or declined to process and refund his deposits.

When he appeared to testify in court on 7.10.2021, he stated that he withdrew from the Respondent on

30.6.2017

. That the Respondent admitted to owing

Kshs.415,850/=.

That the Respondent did not give any explanation on deductions. That he paid

Kshs.5000/=

for the plaza.

Upon cross examination, the Claimant admitted that he received a refund of

Kshs.67,000/=

from the Respondent. That they were not informed about the risk fund.

Respondent’s Case

The Respondent has opposed the claim vide the undated statement of defence filed on

15.8.2019

. The gist of the Respondent’s opposition to the claim is that the Claimant is only entitled to

Kshs.330,600/=

after being refunded a total of

Kshs.47,000/=.

That the total deposits at the time of resignation was

Kshs.377,600/=.

That the Respondent was badly mismanaged and thus unable to refund the deposits in fail.

When he appeared to testify in court on 7.10.2020, he stated that the following monies were not refundable.

a. Share capital Kshs. 4000/=

b. Risk fund Kshs.29,250/=

c. Plaza – Kshs.5000/=

Issues for determination

We have framed the following issues for determination

a. Whether the Respondent owes the Claimant money and it so to what extent;

b. Who should meet the costs of the claim?

Refund

It is the Claimant’s case that he is entitled to a refund of

Kshs.451,850/=

being the cumulative share refund. That to date, he has received a total refund of

Kshs.67,000/=.

On its part, the Respondent contend that the Claimant’s cumulative outstanding deposit is

Kshs.330,600/=.

We have perused the claimant’s

“share statement of Account “

dated 30.6.2016. It shows that the total outstanding deposits as at

28.6.2016

was

Kshs.377,600/=.

We have also perused his statement of account date4d

1.8.2019,

it shows that his outstanding deposits as at

2.1.19

was

Kshs.330,600/=.

We note that the statement dated 1.8.2019 is the most recent one and thus present the most recent status of the share account as opposed to the one produced by the plaintiff dated

30.6.2016.

It thus follows that the Claimants cumulative outstanding deposits is

Kshs.330,600/=.

We agree with the Respondent that a sum of

Kshs.4000/=

being

share capital

is not refundable. Equally, a sum of

Kshs.5000/=

being contributions relating to the

plaza

is not also refundable.

As regards, the claim for risk fund, we do not agree with the Respondent that the same is not refundable. These were monies meant to come into the aid of the Claimants family in the event of death. He is still alive and has ceased being its member. The Respondent therefore does not have any business with the said money. It should refund the same to the Claimant.

Final orders

The upshot of the foregoing is that we find that the Claimant has established his case in a balance of probability. We accordingly enter judgment against the Respondent as follows:-

a. Kshs. 330,000/= being outstanding deposits.

b. Kshs. 29,250/= being deductions towards risk fund.

Total

359,850/=

Respondent to meet costs and interest at court rates.

JUDGMENT SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2021.

HON. B. KIMEMIA CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 4.3.2021

HON. J. MWATSAMA DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 4.3.2021

B. AKUSALA MEMBER SIGNED 4.3.2021

No appearance for parties

HON. B. KIMEMIA CHAIRPERSON SIGNED 4.3.2021