West Kenya ordered to refund farmer for illegal deductions

Magistrate D.S. Aswani noted that the deductions made on the farmer's proceeds were fictitious.
What you need to know:
- The miller had claimed that the contracts to plough Mr Muruli’s two other farms were signed by his late brother.
- Court was told that such contracts must bear the stamp of the local administration for them to be enforceable.
West Kenya Sugar Company has been directed to pay a sugarcane farmer Sh58,334 illegally deducted from the proceeds of cane he delivered to the miller.
Milimani resident magistrate D.S. Aswani noted that the deductions made on Elvis Muruli’s proceeds were fictitious as the miller could not prove that it ploughed, farrowed, and supplied cane seeds to his two other farms.
The miller had claimed that the contracts to plough Mr Muruli’s two other farms were signed by his late brother.
The small claims court was told that such contracts must bear the stamp of the local administration for them to be enforceable.
“I am therefore, persuaded that the respondent failed to meet this burden the same having shifted to it and find that it has failed to prove the basis for the alleged deductions on account of the three farms. The contracts purported to have been entered into by the claimant’s brother on his behalf for the reasons given above are not enforceable,” the court ruled.
Mr Muruli filed the case, stating that he supplied sugarcane on two occasions but the miller deducted Sh58,344 from his proceeds without giving him an explanation.
The miller defended the deductions stating that Mr Muruli had two other parcels measuring approximately four acres and that the company ploughed it and supplied cane seeds to him with corresponding debit notes.
West Kenya maintained that the parties mutually agreed that the miller would be deducted its costs from the sugarcane proceeds.
Mr Muruli dismissed the claim stating that the miller created a fraudulent contract in his name using his particulars and those of his late brother without his knowledge, and that the alleged contracts are illegal.
He said he requested the miller’s services in March 2017 and the deductions were effected in March 2019.
Mr Muruli maintained that he has only one farm and not three as alleged, and that the miller duly deducted its money for the services offered. He further denied sending his late brother to enter into contracts with the miller on his behalf.
The magistrate said in the ruling that by claiming that the contracts were entered into by Muruli’s brother on his behalf, the miller had to prove that the due process had been adhered to for it to be binding.
“At the very least, the respondent ought to have proved indeed the claimant had more than one field as per the contracts,” said the magistrate.
The court suspended its decision for 30 days to allow the miller to move to the High Court.