[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-278393-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":81,"doc-detail-278393-en":127},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","ram-international-limited-v-maasai-mara-university-judgment","Ram International Limited v Maasai Mara University - Judgment","","High Court of Kenya at Kisii judgment in Civil Case No. 5 of 2019 concerning a lease of commercial premises in Kisii Town. Ram International Limited sought rent arrears, accrued rent/loss of profit for the remaining lease term, interests at 14% from 31 May 2017, costs, and other relief. The claimant alleged breach by Maasai Mara University’s premature vacation, while the defendant disputed the basis of the letter of offer, the calculation of sums, and asserted a right to terminate by notice.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/","Template",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/letters/","Letters",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/ram-international-limited-v-maasai-mara-university-judgment/278393/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/ram-international-limited-v-maasai-mara-university-judgment/278393.png","ImageObject",442,249,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Bintang","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-09-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",13,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What relief did Ram International Limited seek from the court?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It sought payment of rent arrears and accrued amounts, interest at court rates (14%) from 31 May 2017, costs of the suit, and further or other relief.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Why did the plaintiff claim the defendant was liable?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The plaintiff alleged that Maasai Mara University breached the lease by vacating the premises before the contractual timeline, leaving rent arrears and causing loss of rental income for the remainder of the lease term.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did Maasai Mara University respond to the claim?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"It denied the plaintiff’s averments, challenged the letter of offer as not being a contract, disputed the mathematical basis of the demanded sums as unreasonable, and argued it could terminate the tenancy by giving notice.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},278393,1790039844,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,89,94,99,104,109,114,118,123],{"id":85,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":86,"show_sort_weight":87,"slug":88},11,"Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":90,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":91,"show_sort_weight":92,"slug":93},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":95,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},14,"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":100,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":105,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":106,"show_sort_weight":107,"slug":108},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":110,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":115,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":117},18,30,"letters",{"id":119,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},21,"Paper Templates",5,"papers-templates",{"id":124,"doc_module":22,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":126},158,"General","general-158",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":128},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":129,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":130,"doc_module":22,"category_id":115,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":131,"file_id":132,"file_url":133,"file_type":134,"file_size":135,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":136,"language":137,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":138,"faqs":139,"seo_title":140,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":141,"read_time":30},962085564381,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","REPUBLIC OF KENYA  \nIN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KISII  \nCIVIL CASE NO.5 OF 2019  \nRAM INTERNATIONAL LIMITED..............................................PLAINTIFF  \nVERSUS  \nMAASAI MARA UNIVERSITY   DEFENDANT  \nJUDGMENT  \n1. The plaintiff sued the defendant herein vide a plaint dated 7 th August 2019, praying that judgment be entered against the defendant in the following terms;  \na. Payment of the sum of Kshs. 112, 276,591/ -only, on account of accumulated and/or accrued Rent Arrears and Accruals/Loss of Profit for the outstanding period of the Lease/Lease term.  \nb. Interests at Court rates (14%) on the outstanding figure/sum, details in terms of Paragraph (a) and (b) above, w.e.f 31st May 2017.  \nc. Costs of this suit be borne by the Defendant  \nd. Such further and/or other relief as the Honourable Court may deem fit and expedient so to grant  \n2. The plaintiff averred that on 2nd January 2015, the Defendant approached it with a request to obtain space within the plaintiff’s LR. No. KISII MUNICIPALITY/BLOCK 111/147 (hereinafter referred to as the “suit property”) which comprises of a multi-storey commercial building, located within Kisii Town. The defendant intended to carrying out educational activities, in the premises for its students residing within Kisii Town and her environs. Subsequently, the parties entered into a lease agreement, whereby the plaintiff leased in favour of the defendant a portion of the suit property, measuring 37, 200 Square Feet. The plaintiff claimed that the Defendant took possession of the suit property with effect from 1st February 2015. The plaintiff claimed that it was an was an express term and condition of the lease agreement that the defendant would pay rent quarterly in advance in the following manner;  \ni. 1st two years rent payable was Kshs. 7,365,600/= only (1,227,600/= per month) plus 16% V.A.T.  \nii. 2nd two years rent payable was Kshs. 8,102,160= only (1,350,360/= per month) plus 16% V.A.T.  \niii. 3rd two years rent payable was Kshs. 8,912,376 only (1,485,396/= per month) plus 16% V.A.T.  \n3. The plaintiff claimed that from 1st February 2015, the defendant paid a total of Kshs. 15,050,728/= in rent up to 31 st May 2017, and vacated the premises before the contractual timeline. By the time the defendant moved out of the premises, it had accrued rent totaling to Kshs. 40,442,054/= . The plaintiff averred that during the period of occupation between 1st February 2015 and 31st May 2017, the defendant paid a total of Kshs. 15,050,728/= leaving rent arrears of Kshs. 25,391,326/= .  \n4. According to the plaintiff, it was also a condition of the agreement that the Defendant would pay a Penalty Interest of 2% per month, for any late payment or default. Therefore, when the Defendant vacated the demised premises, it was in arrears for a total of 26 months and the total interest chargeable over the period of default was a sum of Kshs. 13,203,489/ = .  \n5. The letter of offer which formed the basis of the Contract between the parties was to run for a period of 6 years commencing from 1 st February 2015 and terminating on the 31st January 2021. However, in breach of the letter of offer, the defendant unilaterally vacated the demised premises on 31st July 2019 without regard to the terms of the lease. The plaintiff claimed that as result of the breach, it was deprived of rental income, for a total of 88 months for the remainder period of the lease term, between the 31 st May 2017 to the 31st January 2021. The plaintiff computed its loss for the 88 months as follows;  \ni. 20 months @ Kshs. 1,350,360/=(between 1/6/2017-31/1/2019)  \nii. VAT @ 16 %  \nSUB TOTAL Kshs. 31,328,352/= iii. 24 months @ Kshs. 1,485,396/=(between 1/2/2019-31/1/2021)  \niv. VAT @ 16%  \nSUB TOTAL  \nKshs. 27,007,200/= Kshs. 4,321,152/=  \nKshs. 35,649,504/= Kshs. 5,703,920/= Kshs. 41,353,424/=  \n6. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant was unjustly indebted to in the sum of Kshs. 112,276,591/= comprising of;  \ni. Rent arrears ","cbCaiu2CZ1ET7wqx","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiu2CZ1ET7wqx","pdf",201190,8,"English","# Judgment\n## Plaintiff’s claim\n## Evidence and exhibits","[{\"question\":\"What relief did Ram International Limited seek from the court?\",\"answer\":\"It sought payment of rent arrears and accrued amounts, interest at court rates (14%) from 31 May 2017, costs of the suit, and further or other relief.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the plaintiff claim the defendant was liable?\",\"answer\":\"The plaintiff alleged that Maasai Mara University breached the lease by vacating the premises before the contractual timeline, leaving rent arrears and causing loss of rental income for the remainder of the lease term.\"},{\"question\":\"How did Maasai Mara University respond to the claim?\",\"answer\":\"It denied the plaintiff’s averments, challenged the letter of offer as not being a contract, disputed the mathematical basis of the demanded sums as unreasonable, and argued it could terminate the tenancy by giving notice.\"}]","Ram International Limited v Maasai Mara University - Judgment | PDF",1789509552]