Babu v Southern Haulage (Cause E209 of 2022) [2023] KEBPRT 437 (KLR) (Civ) (19 July 2023) (Judgment)
- Court
- Business Premises Rent Tribunal
- Case number
- 437
- Citation
- [2023] KEBPRT 437 (KLR)
- Decided
- 19 July 2023
The rent increment proposal by the landlord is proper within the rates of market value and due to the inflation factors as well as the factors contained in Regulations 9 of the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) (Tribunal) (Forms and Procedure) Regulations, 1966.
Facts
The tenant, Francis Babu, received a notice from the landlord, Southern Haulage, to increase rent. The tenant moved the Tribunal seeking to restrain the landlord from dealing with the property pending the hearing. The Tribunal ordered the status quo and restrained the landlord from interfering with the tenant's quiet enjoyment.
Issues
- Is the landlord entitled to rent increment?
Reasoning
The Tribunal considered the valuation reports and expert witnesses' testimonies, finding that the rent increment proposal by the landlord is within the market value and justified by inflation factors.
Outcome
The tenant's reference and application are partially dismissed, and the tenant is ordered to pay rent at KShs. 52,000 per month, with each stall paying KShs. 26,000.
Orders
- Tenant's Reference and Application dismissed partially
- Tenant shall pay rent at KShs. 52,000 per month
Remedies
- Landlord is at liberty to distress if the tenant fails to pay rent
Authorities cited
Legislation (2)
- Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act CAP 301
- Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) (Tribunal) (Forms and Procedure) Regulations, 1966
Cases cited (1)
- Careenas Holdings t/a Gigitee Cyber vs. Nawab Mohammed Haji Mirdor [2021] eKLR
Loading judgment…