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

Wangari & 7 others v Ndichu & 3 others (Tribunal Case E1097 of 2024) [2025] KEBPRT 169 (KLR) (3 March 2025) (Ruling)

[2025] KEBPRT 169 (KLR) Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Read PDF
Court
Business Premises Rent Tribunal
Case number
169
Citation
[2025] KEBPRT 169 (KLR)
Decided
3 March 2025
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeSuccession DisputePostureAppeal from a previous decisionCoramA. Muma, Member
Holding

The Tribunal's jurisdiction is upheld, and the Tenants' Reference and Application are allowed with specific terms.

Facts

The tenants are claiming to have built the suit premises with the blessings of their parents before their death. The 1st to 3rd Respondents claim to be the rightful owners of the premises as the children and in-laws of the deceased owner.

Issues

  1. Whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the Tenants' Reference and Application
  2. What orders can the court grant in light of the succession cause

Reasoning

The controlled tenancy relationship exists, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction. The Tenants are ordered to pay rent to a joint account and remain in the premises.

Outcome

The Tribunal's decision is upheld.

Orders

  • The 3rd Respondent's Application is dismissed.
  • A joint interest earning account is to be opened by the Advocates on record for the 1st & 2nd Respondents and the 3rd Respondent.
  • The Tenants shall remain in the suit premises and pay rent to the joint account.
  • Monies paid to the Tribunal are to be released to the joint account.
  • Each party to bear their own costs.

Remedies

  • Remain in the premises and pay rent to a joint account.
  • Joint account for rent payments pending succession confirmation.

Authorities cited

Legislation (1)
  • Landlord and Tenant (Shops, Hotels and catering establishments) Cap 301 Laws of Kenya
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