Kalyan Karsan Patel v Mohamed Hashim Amhed & another [2022] KEELC 720 (KLR)

Facts

The Appellant, Kalyan Karsan Patel, entered into a tenancy agreement with the Respondents, Mohamed Hashim Amhed and Mansoor Ahmed Abdulkarim, for the suit property. The tenancy was initially for 10 years, then reviewed to Kshs. 1000/= per month, and later to Kshs. 2000/= per month. The Respondents served a notice to terminate the tenancy on 18th March 1993, but the Appellant continued to pay rent and occupy the property.

Issues

1. The learned magistrate erred in fact and in law in failing to appreciate and consider the contents and legal purport of the written submissions filed by the defendant.
2. The learned magistrate misdirected himself on the law in declaring the tenancy as having been determined by operations of law.
3. The learned magistrate misdirected himself on the law in respect of the tenancy relationship subsequently created and subsisting between the parties.
4. The learned magistrate failed to appreciate that after the determination of the initial lease, the defendant continued to remain in occupation of the suit property and remit the new monthly rent sum.
5. The learned magistrate erred in fact and in law in ordering the defendant to give vacant possession

Reasoning

The court found that the tenancy was a periodic lease and that the defendant was in periodic tenancy of the suit premises. The court also found that the notice to terminate the tenancy was sufficient and lawful in the circumstances.

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

Authorities cited