A court has ordered a landlord to refund Sh11,500 deposit paid by a tenant after the termination of his tenancy.
Magistrate Judith Omollo noted that claims by the landlord that he incurred expenses to do repairs on the house are not reason enough to withhold the deposit money.
The court noted that the repairs carried out could not be said to restore the house to the state it was before occupation because there was no evidence presented showing the state of the house before occupation.
“In the circumstances, it can be inferred that the respondent may have carried out those repairs to improve the value of its residential premises beyond the condition it was before claimant took occupation,” the magistrate held.
The magistrate noted that on the balance of probability, the tenant, FK, proved his claim against the former landlord that he left the house in the condition he found it, hence he is entitled to a refund of the full deposit as there was no need for repairs.
FK sued the landlord (JM) and a private company. According to suit papers, FK became a JM's tenant in November last year and after five months, he issued notice to terminate the tenancy, but the landlord refused to refund the deposit.
The court was told that FK upon the termination of the tenancy did not return the premises in the condition he found it and therefore the repairs were met by his deposit money.
FK had also paid a water deposit of Sh3,000 at the beginning of the tenancy.
The court, after considering the submissions made before it by both parties, noted it is not in dispute FK was a tenant. The court was left to determine whether or not expenses were incurred in carrying out repairs.
On the issue of water deposit, the court said there was no evidence tendered to show there were water bills left by the claimant.
The magistrate found that FK is also entitled to a refund of the Sh3,000 water deposit.
Consequently, those expenses cannot be attributed to FK, the magistrate held.
