MAJLIS PERBANDARAN AMPANG JAYA V. STEVEN PHOA CHENG LOON
& ORS
17 FEBRUARY 2006 - FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO. 01-4-2004 (W)]
TAN TAK & ORS V. MAHABUILDERS SDN BHD
01 MARCH 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: 24-1740-2003]
[1]The plaintiffs were the unfortunate purchasers of units of apartments
in Skudaiville Condominium at that period of time when the country was in
the grips of the economic downturn of 1997.[2]The condominium was to be
developed by a company called Eastern Enterprise Berhad on land known as
PTD 71028 HS(D) 239702 Mukim Pulai, Johor. [3]The land was charged as collateral
by Eastern Enterprise to MBf Finance to finance the development. [4]Eastern
Enterprise ran into financial difficulties and had to abandon Skudaiville.
It could not service the loan it obtained from MBf Finance which in time
became non performing. Soon it went into liquidation.
JOHN DENIS DE SILVA V. CRESCENT COURT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
03 MARCH 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: S6-24-2340-2004]
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Service - Ex parte injunction order - Delay in
service - Delay due to court - Whether justice of case overrides technical
non-compliance - Rules of the High Court 1980, O. 1A, O. 2 r. 1(1), (3),
O. 29 r. 1(2BA)
CIVIL PROCEDURE: Injunction - Interim injunction to restrain management
corporation from preventing condo unit owner entry - Whether owner had unrestricted
right of entry - Whether owner's failure to pay maintenance charges a ground
for refusing entry - Whether justice of case in favour of owner
LAND LAW: Strata title - Management corporation - Denying parcel owners
right of entry on grounds that maintenance charges not paid - Whether denial
unjustified and no legal grounds - Whether charges recoverable only by way
of action for debt in court - Strata Titles Act 1985, ss. 52, 53, 53A and
75
HAZLINDA HAMZAH V. KUMON METHOD OF LEARNING CENTRE
6 MARCH 2006 - COURT OF APEAL, PUTRAJAYA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO. W-04-78-2004]
...At the conclusion of the arguments on 6 February 2006, this appeal
was allowed. The orders of the High Court were set aside. The substantive
motion for judicial review was dismissed. It was also ordered that the appellant
was to have the costs occasioned here and in the court below. The deposit
was ordered to be refunded to the appellant.
KAMALANATHAN
PONNUMBALAN V. TENAGA NASIONAL BHD
7 MARCH 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU
[CIVIL SUIT NO: MT(3)22-585-1998]
PUBLIC UTILITIES: Electricity - Charges - Refusal of consumer
to pay - Supplier disconnected supply of electricity - Whether a breach
of contract by supplier - Defamation - Damages - Electricity Supply Act
1990, ss. 30(1), 32
CONTRACT: Breach - Action for damages - Public utilities - Supplier
disconnected supply of electricity after refusal by consumer to pay charges
- Whether a breach of contract by supplier - Electricity Supply Act 1990,
ss. 30(1), 32
TORT: Damages - Defamation - Public utilities - Supplier disconnected
supply of electricity after refusal by consumer to pay charges - Whether
notices to disconnect and acts of disconnection considered defamatory to
consumer - Electricity Supply Act 1990, ss. 30(1), 32
LIEW YOK YIN V. AGS HARTA SDN BHD
22 MARCH 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU
[CIVIL SUIT NO: [MT-1] 22-436-2002]
LAND LAW: Indefeasibility of title and interests - Forged transfer
- Whether plaintiff had an indefeasible title - Whether defendant bona fide
purchaser for value - National Land Code 1965, s. 340(2)(b), (3)
NORESAH LANI V. RHB BANK BERHAD
19 APRIL 2006 - HIGH COURT [KUALA LUMPUR]
CIVIL SUIT NO: D8-22-1370-2005
GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT
The Plaintiff filed an application in Enclosure 4 for an injunction to restrain
the Defendant from selling the Plaintiff's property known as Unit No. 211,
Storey 3 of Building No. W, Road SS15/8, Phase SJ85, My Place, with an address
at 211W, Jalan SS15/8, 47500 Subang Jaya, by way of public auction, foreclosure
or in whatever manner. The Plaintiff also prays for an order that the Defendant
within 14 days from the date of the Order supply the Plaintiff with monthly
statements of the loan under the Agreement between the Plaintiff and Kwong
Yik Bank Berhad dated 11 May [1991] from the date of commencement of the
loan until the date of the order. Further, the Plaintiff prays for an injunction
to restrain the Defendant from proceeding with the case in Kuala Lumpur
Sessions Court No: 8-52-15686-2005 until the disposal of this case.
TAN CHEE WAH LWN. SRI DAMANSARA SDN BHD
26 APRIL 2006 - MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[RAYUAN SIVIL NO. R1-12-303-2004]
Dengan hormatnya saya tidak dapat bersetuju dengan keputusan HMS seperti
di atas. Di peringkat rayuan isu utama yang dibangkitkan di hadapan saya
ialah sama ada pihak-pihak boleh mengubah perjanjian jual beli tersebut
dengan surat bertarikh 26 Mei 2000. Perayu mengatakan boleh, manakala responden
mengatakan tidak boleh. Saya bersetuju dengan perayu. It would appear that
only 'contracting out' in favour of the weaker party - ie, the purchaser
might be countenanced by the Courts.
ARAB MALAYSIAN BANK BHD v. STRATEGI CERAH SDN BHD & ORS
22 MAY 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[CIVIL SUIT NO: D8-22-3310-1999]
CONTRACT: Loan - Breach - Plaintiff bank granted 1st defendant
a term loan and entered into a loan agreement cum assignment - Whether term
loan and agreement frustrated and became void - Whether there was a total
failure of consideration - Whether plaintiff had right in personam - Rules
of the High Court 1980, O. 14A
BANKING: Banks and banking business - Loan - Plaintiff bank granted
1st defendant a term loan and entered into a loan agreement cum assignment
- Whether term loan and agreement frustrated and became void - Whether there
was a total failure of consideration - Whether plaintiff had right in personam
- Rules of the High Court 1980, O. 14A
N
& N CONSULTANTS SDN BHD V. MBF PROPERTY SERVICES SDN BHD & ANOR
30 MAY 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM
[CIVIL SUIT NOS: MT1-24-754-1997 & MT1-24-755-1997]
[1] Vide encl. 1, which was an originating summons, the plaintiff had
sought two orders of declaration, viz.: 1. that it was not to pay the installment
payments to the second defendant until the certificate of fitness of occupation
was issued by the relevant authority, with the consequential effect being
that the prematurely paid installments grossing RM140,308.92 made up of
the principal sum and interest be refunded; and2. that the first defendant
do pay to the second defendant the interest for the loan pursuant to its
undertaking to pay, until the issuance of the certificate of fitness of
occupation.
Tan Tien Seng v. Grobina Resorts Sdn Bhd
23 JUNE 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO. 24-537-2000]
Application: This is the defendant's application in encl (56)
for an order that execution of the judgment of the court delivered on 14
July 2005 ("the judgment") be stayed until the disposal of the defendant's
appeal by the Court of Appeal.
(See also -
Tan Tien Seng & Ors v. Grobina Resorts Sdn Bhd
(14 JULY 2005 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA)
KWAN CHEW HOLDINGS SDN BHD V. KWONG YIK BANK BHD
14 AUGUST 2006 - COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02-427-2000]
CHIN KIT YEE & ANOR V. YENG CHONG REALTY BHD
17 AUGUST 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA
[CIVIL SUIT NO: MT1-22-167-2003]
Tan Tien Seng & Anor v. Grobina Resorts Sdn Bhd
18 AUGUST 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA
[COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO: MT1-28-1-2006]
Petition: Before me is the judgment creditors' petition in encl.
(3) for an order that the respondent ("judgment debtor") be wound up under
s. 218(1)(e) of the Companies Act 1965 ("the petition") with consequential
orders for the appointment of the director general of the Insolvency Department
as the judgment debtor's provisional liquidator, and costs.
YOKE SAN & ORS v. PENTADBIR TANAH, WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN KUALA
LUMPUR & ORS
30 AUGUST 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO: S6-21-196-2003]
LAND LAW: Acquisition of land - Compensation - Injurious affection
- Acquired land includes service road and parking bays utilised by building
owners running businesses alongside - Whether building owners injuriously
affected by acquisition - Whether building owners entitled to share in compensation
awarded to registered proprietor of acquired land
LEW PA LEONG V. CHI SHEN LAN
09 OCTOBER 2006 - COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: W-02-402-2006]
[1] This is the judgment of the court.[2] This appeal is directed against
the order of the High Court dismissing the plaintiff's (the appellant before
us) originating summons dated 8 October 2004. In that summons, the plaintiff
claimed, inter alia, a declaration that the defendant (the respondent before
us) holds a one half share in a certain property in trust for him. The property
in question is a shop-lot in Taman Tun Dr. Ismail, Kuala Lumpur.
PALMERSTON HOLDINGS SDN BHD V. CHONG SIEW ENG
13 OCTOBER 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA
[SUIT NO: 22-160-2002]
CONTRACT: Specific performance - Sale and purchase agreement -
Default in payment - Whether plaintiff entitled to decree of specific performance
- Whether plaintiff entitled to annul SPA - Whether defendant's claim statute
barred
CONTRACT: Specific performance - Sale and purchase agreement - Interpretation
of - Regulation 11(1) of the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing)
Regulations 1989 made under the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing)
Act 1966 - Whether plaintiff entitled to specific performance - Whether
plaintiff entitled to annul SPA - Whether defendant's claim statute barred
MAHFAR ALWEE V. JEJAKA MEGAH SDN BHD & ANOR
18 OCTOBER 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, MELAKA
[CIVIL SUIT NO: MT1-22-40-2002]
[4] The plaintiff's affidavit in support averred that he was the purchaser
of a low cost house in a housing project for which he had paid RM23,782
representing 60% of the purchase price. The housing project has since been
abandoned but was subsequently taken over by the first defendant ("D1")
to whom the second defendant ("D2") has given a loan of RM3.2 million with
a view to rehabilitation, completion and delivery of vacant possession to
the purchasers including the plaintiff.
EU SIM CHUAN V. KRIS ANGSANA SDN BHD
22 OCTOBER 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[CIVIL SUIT NO: S2(S5)-22-432-1997]
In this case, the plaintiffs, who are husband and wife, are the owners
of a property at No. 290A, Lorong Palas, Off Jalan Ampang, 50450 Kuala Lumpur
on which is constructed a double storey bungalow house (the said property).
The property is registered in the name of the wife (the 1st plaintiff) but
the purchase of the said property was wholly financed by the husband the
second plaintiff (PW1). Needless to say that the second plaintiff has beneficial
interest of the said property. Both husband and wife had been living together
in the said bungalow house together with their children until it was damaged
by the defendant which led them to bring this action against the defendant.
ABDUL AZIZ ABDUL HAMID & YANG LAIN LWN. PERAK ROADWAYS BHD
30 OKTOBER 2006 - MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, IPOH
[GUAMAN SIVIL NO. 22-162-2002]
The crucial question is: regard being had to the provisions of cl 18
of the agreement, when did the purchaser's right to sue for the agreed liquidated
damages for the delay accrue?
ABRIC PROJECT MANAGEMENT SDN BHD V. PALMSHINE PLAZA SDN BHD
& ANOR
30 NOVEMBER 2006 - HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
[COMPANIES (WINDING-UP) NO: D5-28-311-1999]
Balance Of Justice
[89] The balance of justice is against the granting of the application
in encl. 37. To set aside the sale of the said land would not be a commercially
viable decision. It serves no good of the 1st respondent company as well
as to the shareholders, and creditors.
[90] Since the purchase of the said land, the 2nd respondent has since proceeded
to develop the said land:
(a) the 2nd respondent has entered to enter into a joint venture with IJM
Properties Sdn. Bhd. ("IJM") develop the said land;
(b) the 2nd respondent applied and obtained approval for the extension of
the leasehold tenure of the said land from 65 to 99 years and in doing so
incurred the payment of RM6,551,938;
(c) construction works have commenced; and
(d) approximately 164 purchasers have entered into sale and purchase
agreements for the purchase of development units comprised in the development.
[91] It would therefore cause great injustice not only to the 2nd respondent
but also IJM and the many purchasers who have since entered into agreements
to buy units. This is not a case in which the act of the liquidator can
easily be reversed without grave consequences. Again, the applicant chose
to awaken too late.
TAN KIM SONG LWN. PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI PERAK & SATU
LAGI
27 DISEMBER 2006 - MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA, IPOH
[GUAMAN SIVIL NO: 22-271-99]
UNDANG-UNDANG TANAH: Pemaju rumah - Perjanjian jual beli - Pelaksanaan
spesifik - Pemaju menukarkan lot tanah yang dipersetujui dalam perjanjian
dengan lot lain atas alasan lot yang dipersetujui dikhaskan untuk bumiputra
- Sama ada wujudnya suatu kontrak di antara pemaju dan pembeli bagi lot
yang dipersetujui
KONTRAK: Perjanjian jual beli tanah - Pelaksanaan spesifik - Pemaju
menukarkan lot tanah yang dipersetujui dalam perjanjian dengan lot lain
atas alasan lot yang dipersetujui dikhaskan untuk bumiputra - Sama ada wujudnya
suatu kontrak di antara pemaju dan pembeli bagi lot yang dipersetujui
