SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Nduta v Mwangi & another (Tribunal Case E084 of 2022) [2023] KEBPRT 417 (KLR) (Civ) (19 July 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEBPRT 417 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
417
Citation
[2023] KEBPRT 417 (KLR)
Decided
19 July 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeLandlord and Tenant DisputePostureAppeal from a previous rulingCoramA. Muma
Holding

The tenant's reference and application dated 6th July 2022 are dismissed in the following terms: the tenant shall hand over vacant possession of the premises failure to which the landlord shall be at liberty to break in to the premises. OCS Bondeni Police Station to assist with compliance. Each party shall bear their own Costs.

Facts

The tenant, Lynn Nduta, rented space from landlords Mary Mwangi and Charles Wagana. The tenant filed a reference and notice of motion application seeking to be restrained from eviction, harassment, and reinstatement. The application was dismissed for non-attendance, and the landlord was granted leave to levy distress. The tenant then filed an application to reinstate the reference, which was upheld.

Issues

  1. Whether the landlord's action to levy distress for rent was lawful?
  2. Whether the termination notice issued by the landlord and the reasons advanced are valid?

Reasoning

The tenant's application was dismissed due to non-attendance, and the landlord was granted leave to levy distress. The tenant's subsequent application to reinstate the reference was upheld.

Outcome

The tenant's reference and application were dismissed.

Orders

  • The tenant shall hand over vacant possession of the premises failure to which the landlord shall be at liberty to break in to the premises.
  • OCS Bondeni Police Station to assist with compliance.
  • Each party shall bear their own Costs.
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case