Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
AI-generated case brief
Case Brief · caselaw.co.ke
ELCStruck OutNot stated in the judgment· [2025] KEELC 6236 (KLR)

Mutuku v Mkono Poa Housing Co-operative Society Ltd (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 6236 (KLR)

Environment and Land Court
24 September 2025
2,340 words in judgment
View original judgmentRead on Kenya Law Watch case
AI-assisted case brief
·~9 min to read original · ~4 min brief

The bottom line

#

The Environment and Land Court in Machakos struck out a Kshs. 18 million land sale claim because disputes between co-operative society members and their society must go to the Co-operative Tribunal.

What this practically means

#

Executive summary

#
The Plaintiff, registered owner of parcel No. Mavoko Town Block 3/2791 (approximately 8.820 hectares), sued the Defendant, a deposit-taking co-operative society, seeking specific performance of a written sale agreement dated 2nd July 2021 for Kshs. 26,000,000/-, of which only Kshs. 8,000,000/- had been paid. The Plaintiff sought payment of the Kshs. 18,000,000/- balance, general damages for breach, interest and costs. The Defendant denied breaching the agreement, asserting the Plaintiff frustrated its completion, and raised a preliminary objection on jurisdiction under section 76(2) of the Co-operative Societies Act, Cap 490, contending that as a member of the society the Plaintiff was mandated to take the dispute to the Co-operative Tribunal. An earlier preliminary objection dated 13th March 2023 had been dismissed by Justice Christine Ochieng as premature. The court applied the Mukisa Biscuits test for preliminary objections and the authorities defining the 'business of the society', including Gatanga Coffee Growers Co-operative Society Ltd vs Gitau. Relying on Speaker of the National Assembly vs James Njenga Karume and Charles Keragita Arwenya vs Nyakoe Farmers Co-operative Society Ltd, the court held that where statute provides a clear dispute-resolution mechanism, it must be strictly followed, and that section 76 ousts the original jurisdiction of courts over disputes between co-operative societies and their members, the business of the society being wide enough to include sale of land. The court upheld the preliminary objection and struck out the Plaintiff's suit with costs to the Defendant, the proper forum being the Co-operative Tribunal.

Key legal issues

#
01

Whether the dispute over the sale agreement falls within section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act as a dispute concerning the business of the society

Holding

Yes. The business of a society is to be discerned from its constitution or by-laws, and the phrase 'business of the society' covers every activity within its by-laws, including sale of land; the suit should have been filed before the Co-operative Tribunal.

Reasoning

The court considered section 76 of the Act and the Gatanga Coffee Growers authority defining 'business of the society'. The Plaintiff admitted the Defendant is a registered deposit-taking co-operative society and that he is its member. Applying the view that where statutes provide clear dispute-resolution procedures, those must be strictly followed, and noting the Tribunal is the final forum below the High Court's appellate jurisdiction, the court held the matter belonged to the Tribunal.

p. 5
02

Whether the preliminary objection on jurisdiction, though previously dismissed as premature, could properly be determined at the close of the case

Holding

Yes. A preliminary objection may be raised at any time before final conclusion of the case, and the jurisdictional issue ought to be determined first.

Reasoning

The court noted the earlier ruling of Justice Christine Ochieng dismissed the objection as premature because membership and amounts outstanding required ascertainment. Relying on Mukisa Biscuits and the Mwaura case, it held that a preliminary objection raising a pure point of law can be brought at any time before final conclusion, and that jurisdiction goes to the root and should be established first.

p. 3
03

Whether the High Court/Court can assume original jurisdiction over co-operative disputes where section 81 provides appellate jurisdiction from the Tribunal

Holding

No. Section 76 ousts original jurisdiction in such disputes; the only jurisdiction open is appellate under section 81.

Reasoning

Following Charles Keragita Arwenya, the court reasoned that since the High Court is the final court in co-operative matters on appeal, it would be improper for it also to assume original jurisdiction over the same disputes. The proper forum for a member's claim against the society is the Tribunal.

p. 5

Legal principles established

#
  • The words 'the business of the society' in section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act are wide enough to include the business of sale of land by the society.
  • Section 76 of the Co-operative Societies Act ousts the original jurisdiction of the High Court (and by extension this Court) in disputes involving co-operative societies and their members; only appellate jurisdiction under section 81 remains.

Court orders

#
  1. 1.Preliminary objection upheld
  2. 2.Plaintiff's suit struck out with costs to the Defendant
Jurisdiction invoked
Environment and Land Court jurisdiction; preliminary objection under Section 76(2) of the Co-operative Societies Act, Cap 490

Key timeline

#

Practical implications

#

Frequently asked questions

#

Cite this brief

#

Cite this brief

Caselaw, "Mutuku v Mkono Poa Housing Co-operative Society Ltd (Environment and Land Case E003 of 2023) [2025] KEELC 6236 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Not stated in the judgment. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keelc/2025/6236/eng@2025-09-24

Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.