Mwangi & another v Murutani Teachers Sacco (Tribunal Case E942 of 2024) [2025] KEBPRT 351 (KLR) (17 July 2025) (Judgment)
Neutral citation:
[2025] KEBPRT 351 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
Tribunal Case E942 of 2024
N Wahome, Chair & Joyce Murigi, Member
July 17, 2025
Between
Peter Irungu Mwangi
1st Tenant
Milkah Njambi
2nd Tenant
and
Murutani Teachers Sacco
Landlord
Judgment
1.This is a Judgement on the reference dated 28/8/2024. The Tenant is seeking to have this tribunal investigate the matter and determine the issues involved. The reference is anchored on Section 6 of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act Cap.301) hereinafter referred to as “the Act”.
2.There has been before this court BPRT case no. E148 of 2024 between the same parties and over the same subject matter. The case was decided by way of Judgement delivered on the 6/6/2024 in which this court made the following holding:-i.That the Tenant shall be allowed quiet possession of the demised premises unless otherwise disturbed in strict compliance with the Act.ii.Prior to the reference dated 28/8/2024, the Tenant had filed another reference dated 27/8/2024. The same is anchored on Section 12(4) of the Act. It is actually a complaint. In it the Tenant grieved that:-
3.The termination notice complained about is dated 24/6/2024. The same was issued barely 20 days after the judgement in BPRT Case No. E148 of 2024. In the said judgement dated 6/6/2024, the landlord was never exempted from the operation of section 9(3) of the Act.
4.The section states that:-
5.Therefore, without the court making an order for exemption from compliance with Section 9(3) it then follows that the Landlord could not issue a notice of termination before the 6/6/2025. By that reason, the notice of termination dated 24/6/2024 fails and with it, the Tenant’s references dated 27/8/2024 and 28/8/2024 succeeds.
6.Over and above the fatality of the notice of termination dated 24/6/2024 on technicality, we doubt that the same even if issued within the statutory timelines, that it could have been in compliance with the law.
7.Section 4(2) of the Act provides that:-
8.The required prescribed form is provided for under Regulation 4 of the Regulations to the Act. It provides that:-
9.On the other hand, Section 4(4) of the Act provides that:-
10.In our view, the month that counted in the notice was the month of July 2024, only. It was the only complete month as envisaged by the Act. The effective date of the notice should therefore have been 1st September, 2024 for the landlord to have complied with Section 4(2) of the Act and Regulation 4(1) of the Regulations to the Act.
11.Section 3(1) of the interpretation and general provisions Act Cap 2 of the Laws of Kenya defines a month as “means a calendar month”.On the other hand order 50 Rule (1) of the Civil Procedure Rules provides that:-
12.The Black’s Law Dictionary defines a month as:-
13.The termination notice dated 24/6/2024 did not comply with Section 4(4) of the Act and was therefore of no effect to the Tenancy herein.
14.Cap. 301 is a special legislation which calls for complete compliance with its provision so any short coming from the expected compliance may not be accommodated in any way. The need for such compliance has been emphasized in many superior court’s decisions.
15.The leading one being the case of Manaver N. Alibhai T/a Diani Boutique v South Coast Fitness and Sports Centre, civil Appeal No.203 of 1994 where it was held that:-
16.Therefore and though this Tribunal should be seen to promote and encourage enterprise, sadly the law must at the back of the mind be always in complete and strict Application. We would therefore allow the Tenants references both dated 27/8/2024 and 28/8/2024 respectively.
17.On costs, we follow the conventional wisdom of Section 27 of the Civil Procedure Act and award costs to the Tenant who is the successful party.
18.In the final analysis, the orders that commend to us are the following:-i.That the Tenants references dated the 27/8/2024 and 28/8/2024 are allowed in terms that the Tenant shall be allowed complete quiet possession of the demised premises known as “carwash at the Backyard” and situate on plot No. 11/87.ii.That the Tenant is awarded costs assessed at Kshs.20,000/- to be offset from the rent payable.iii.That the landlord is at liberty to issue a fresh termination notice within 30 days of the date hereof if it so wishes.Those are the orders of the court.
JUDGEMENT DATED, SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY AT MOMBASA THIS 17TH DAY OF JULY 2025.HON. NDEGWA WAHOME MBS, - PANEL CHAIRPERSONHON. JOYCE MURIGI, - MEMBER,BUSINESS PREMSIES RENT TRIBUNAL (BPRT)Ruling delivered in the presence of Mr. Kiwinga Counsel for the Landlord and Mr. Peter Irungu Mwangi the 1st Applicant in person.HON. NDEGWA WAHOME MBS, - PANEL CHAIRPERSONHON. JOYCE MURIGI, - MEMBER,BUSINESS PREMSIES RENT TRIBUNAL (BPRT)