1. ) P. ANBUKARASI A/P PUNUSAMY 2. ) MURUGAIAH A/L ARUMUGAM MATRIX CONCEPTS SDN BHD

1. ) P. ANBUKARASI A/P PUNUSAMY 2. ) MURUGAIAH A/L ARUMUGAM MATRIX CONCEPTS SDN BHD

The contract and contemporaneous documents specified the property by size and price (PT25789, total land 2,647 sq ft, built-up 3,048 sq ft, price RM983,888). The sale complied with those terms; there was no proven breach, misrepresentation or forgery and plaintiffs failed to identify contractual terms entitling them to 997 sq ft additional land or to prove loss. Specific performance was unavailable for uncertain terms (s.20(1)(c) Specific Relief Act). The High Court will not disturb the trial judge's findings. Appeal dismissed with costs.

Citation
NA-12BNCvC-9-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff Appellant: P. Anbukarasi a/p Punusamy; Plaintiff Appellant: Murugaiah a/l Arumugam; Defendant Respondent: Matrix Concept Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 November 2024
Case Number
NA-12BNCvC-9-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Specific Performance, Misrepresentation, Damages, Costs, Forgery Allegation, Appellate Review of Factual Findings
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Property Equity Civil Procedure Evidence Breach of Contract Specific Performance Misrepresentation +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. Anbukarasi a/p Punusamy

Plaintiff Appellant

Murugaiah a/l Arumugam

Plaintiff Appellant

Matrix Concept Sdn Bhd

Defendant Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendant breached the Sale and Purchase Agreement by delivering an end lot instead of the agreed corner lot
  2. 2 Whether the signatures on the Purchase Form were forged
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs proved entitlement to specific performance or damages including exemplary damages and legal costs

Ratio Decidendi

The contract and contemporaneous documents specified the property by size and price (PT25789, total land 2,647 sq ft, built-up 3,048 sq ft, price RM983,888). The sale complied with those terms; there was no proven breach, misrepresentation or forgery and plaintiffs failed to identify contractual terms entitling them to 997 sq ft additional land or to prove loss. Specific performance was unavailable for uncertain terms (s.20(1)(c) Specific Relief Act). The High Court will not disturb the trial judge's findings. Appeal dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs of the appeal fixed at RM5,000 to be paid by the plaintiffs to the defendant subject to assessment (fi alokatur)