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

Maina v Mohamud (Tribunal Case E130 of 2024) [2024] KEBPRT 1428 (KLR) (25 September 2024) (Ruling)

[2024] KEBPRT 1428 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
1428
Citation
[2024] KEBPRT 1428 (KLR)
Decided
25 September 2024
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeBusiness Premises Rent DisputePostureAppeal from a previous rulingCoramHON. NDEGWA WAHOME, HON. JOYCE MURIGI
Holding

The court declares the Landlord's notice to vacate illegal and grants the Tenant's application for quiet possession.

Facts

The Tenant, Douglas Maina, had a tenancy agreement with the Landlord, Mohamed Mohamud, for a shop in Mombasa Likoni. The Landlord issued a notice to vacate the premises on May 7, 2024, and the Tenant responded by issuing his own letter dated May 22, 2024, disputing the notice's legality. The Landlord claimed the Tenant owed rent and had defaulted on payments for two years.

Issues

  1. Validity of the Landlord's notice to vacate
  2. Tenant's right to quiet possession

Reasoning

The court found the Landlord's notice to vacate was not in compliance with the Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act and the prescribed form, thus invalid.

Outcome

Tenant's application granted

Orders

  • Tenant to be granted quiet possession
  • Tenant to continue paying rent as agreed
  • Landlord to pay Kshs. 20,000/= in costs to the Tenant

Remedies

  • Quiet possession for the Tenant
  • Continued rent payments by the Tenant

Authorities cited

Legislation (2)
  • Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and Catering Establishments) Act (Cap 301)
  • Civil Procedure Act
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