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

Mohamed t/a Septar Solution Limited v Harsha Construction Limited (Tribunal Case E607 of 2022) [2023] KEBPRT 43 (KLR) (Civ) (14 February 2023) (Ruling)

[2023] KEBPRT 43 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
43
Citation
[2023] KEBPRT 43 (KLR)
Decided
14 February 2023
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeCivilPostureReference and Motion ApplicationCoramA. Muma, VICE CHAIR
Holding

The Tenant is not in rent arrears, but the rent should be assessed by a valuer. The Landlord is not entitled to levy distress for rent without tribunal's leave.

Facts

The Tenant, Mohamed t/a Septar Solution Limited, is in a controlled tenancy arrangement with the Landlord, Harsha Construction Limited. The Tenant filed a reference and motion application alleging interference with peaceful possession and non-payment of rent.

Issues

  1. Whether Tenant is in rent arrears
  2. Whether the Landlord is entitled to levy distress for rent
  3. Whether the Tenant is entitled to rent assessment

Reasoning

The Landlord has not provided a Statement of Accounts, and the Tenant has unilaterally decided to pay 100,000 per month, which could be the cause of the disputed arrears. The Proclamation Notice dated 4th July 2022 is irregular.

Outcome

The Tenant's application is allowed with specific terms.

Orders

  • Tenant to carry out a valuation and establish rent payable and lettable area within 30 days.
  • Landlord to do their independent report within 30 days.
  • Joint report on lettable space by both valuers should accompany the said reports.
  • Tenant to continue paying rent at Kshs. 100,000.00.
  • Landlord to remove the machine blocking the entrance.
  • Mention on April 20, 2023 to confirm compliance.
  • Costs shall be in the Cause.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act cap 301
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