Case ID:181927

Michael Mubea Ndurumo v National Hospital Insurance Fund Sacco Society Limited [2021] eKLR

Case Metadata

Case Number:

Tribunal Case 276 of 2020

Parties:

Michael Mubea Ndurumo v National Hospital Insurance Fund Sacco Society Limited

Date Delivered:

29 Jul 2021

Case Class:

Civil

Court:

Cooperative Tribunal

Case Action:

Ruling

Judge(s):

Hon. B. Kimemia - Chairperson, Hon. J. Mwatsama - Deputy Chairperson & Mr. Gitonga Kamiti - Member

Citation:

Michael Mubea Ndurumo v National Hospital Insurance Fund Sacco Society Limited [2021] eKLR

Advocates:

Omangi Gichane for Respondent

Wanja Mungai holding brief for Kimondo for Claimant

Court Division:

Tribunal

County:

Nairobi

Advocates:

Omangi Gichane for Respondent

Wanja Mungai holding brief for Kimondo for Claimant

History Advocates:

Both Parties Represented

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.276 OF 2020

MICHAEL MUBEA NDURUMO...........................................................CLAIMANT

VERSUS

NATIONAL HOSPITAL INSURANCE FUND

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

RULING

1. The Application for determination is one dated

8.4.2021

and filed on even date.

The Applications seeks for Orders:

a. This Application be certified as urgent and heard ex parte in the first instance.

b. This Honourable court be pleased to grant leave to the Respondent to liquidate the outstanding decretal sum of kshs.584, 250/- by paying a sum of Kshs.50,000/= per month until payment in full.

c. The interest rate be renewed from 14% to 12%.

d. The Claimant be restrained from levying execution as long as the Respondent pays the proposed monthly installments.

2. The same is premised on the grounds on the face of the Application and supported by the Affidavit of

Sophie Otiu

the Respondent’s Manager to wit she averred that.

Judgment was entered in favour of Claimant as against the Respondent on

3.3.2021.

That Notice of Entry of Judgment is for a sum of

Kshs.384,250/=

with

14%

interest per annum.

That the interest rate of the Respondent is governed and regulated by statute capped at

1%

per annum that is,

12%

per annum.

The Respondent By-laws provide that Share Capital of

Kshs.20,000/=

cannot be refunded but transferred to another member of the Sacco.

That there are 50 files before the Co-operative Tribunal against Respondent seeking refund of shares and Respondent is unable to keep up with the demands of members withdrawing from the Sacco.

He further averred Respondent is willing to liquidate the amount by installment of

Kshs.50,000/=

payment in full.

3. The Claimant’s filed Grounds of Opposition dated

20.4.2021

in opposition of Application dated

8.4.2021

and stated one, the Application is an abuse of the court process.

That the Supporting Affidavit of

Sophie Otiu

does not make a case to warrant ordering sought.

The Respondent continues to offer credit to its members and thus cannot claim to be unable to pay the decretal sum.

4. The Claimant further filed a Replying Affidavit dated

20.4.2021

filed on

10.5.2021

and stated.

That the Application was meant to delay justice.

That he had withdrawn from the Sacco since

25.7.2018

and since then the Respondent has not paid him his cash.

That the

14%

interest is what he pleaded and is what is the interest chargeable at the Tribunal.

5. Parties were ordered to file written submissions to dispose off the Application as per directions given on

8.4.2021.

The Claimants filed their submissions dated

15.6.2021

filed on

18.6.2021

.

6. Having analyzed the set of written submissions, Affidavits from all parties the issues are:

Issue One:

Whether the court can grant orders for installment payment of decretal sum.

Issue Two:

The interest rate to be used.

ISSUE ONE

:

Whether the court can grant orders for installment payment of decretal sum.

The Applicant requests court for orders to pay the decretal sum in installments of

Kshs.50,000/=.

The Applicant relies on Section 1A, 1B, and 3A of the Civil Procedure Act Cap 21.

The Claimant states the same is an abuse of the court process.

7. The Application calls for the Court’s discretion in its determination. There are some known principles to guide the court when exercising discretion.

One:

This is an equitable remedy available at a deserving party.

Two:

The same is made on a case to case basis.

Three:

Reasons for application in this instance installment need to be reasonable to the satisfaction of the court.

Four:

prejudice suffered by the other party if leave is granted to pay via installment.

The court entered judgment as against the Respondent.

It should not be the court’s business how the same is paid. There are clearly laid out procedures to which Claimant can follow to ensure payment of his decretal sum.

No justifiable reasons have been set out by the Applicant’s why the decretal sum should be made via installment.

The Claimant rightly withdrew from the Respondent membership in 2018 and if at all the Respondent were keen on payment they would have done it then.

It is almost 3 years since and Claimant has to enjoy the fruits of his Labour.

8.

Issue Two

:

It is law that the court rates are held at

12% per annum.

The Claimant seeks to have the interest rate of

14%

renewed to

12%.

They claim their rates are at

1%

per month culminating to

12%

per annum.

To this end we shall use the court rates which stands at

12%

per annum.

9. Without much further ado the Ruling of this Honourable Tribunal is that:

1. Prayer one –Spent

2. Prayer Two – Fails

3. Prayer Three - in the following terms, judgment confirmed at Kshs.584,250/= , any further interest chargeable from the date of Ruling will be at 12% per annum.

4. Prayer Four – Fails.

5. Costs of the Application assessed at Kshs.10,000/= to be paid to the Claimant by the Respondent.

RULING SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT NAIROBI THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2021.

Hon. B. Kimemia Chairperson Signed 29.7.2021

Hon. J. Mwatsama Deputy Chairperson Signed 29.7.2021

Mr. Gitonga Kamiti Member Signed 29.7.2021

Tribunal Clerk Charles Maina

Omangi Gichane for Respondent

Wanja Mungai holding brief for Kimondo for Claimant.

Hon. B. Kimemia Chairperson Signed 29.7.2021