AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 827235 – A) AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 827235 – A)

AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 827235 – A) AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 827235 – A)

The written tenancy agreements were valid, binding and conclusive of the parties' intentions; the Defendant voluntarily executed the agreements, paid significant deposits and undertook renovations and furnishing demonstrating possession; there was no reliable contemporaneous documentary evidence of any trust in favour of the Defendant; notices were served in accordance with the tenancy agreement; therefore the trial judge's finding that the Defendant breached the tenancy and the award of arrears (except 2013–2014 due to defective proof of service) and double rent was correct and should be affirmed.

Citation
BA-12BNCVC-68-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant (defendant Below): AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 710353 – P); Respondent (plaintiff Below): AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 827235 – A)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Case Number
BA-12BNCVC-68-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Sessions Court affirmed
Legal Topics
Tenancy Agreement, Arrears of Rent, Double Rent, Constructive Trust, Vacant Possession, Service of Notice, Parol Evidence Rule
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Trust Property Landlord and Tenant Evidence Tenancy Agreement Arrears of Rent Double Rent +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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 710353 – P)

Appellant (defendant Below)

AL – MADINAH INTERNATIONAL (M) SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 827235 – A)

Respondent (plaintiff Below)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenancy agreements were valid and binding
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff held the building on trust for the defendant
  3. 3 Whether arrears of rent claimed were proved

Ratio Decidendi

The written tenancy agreements were valid, binding and conclusive of the parties' intentions; the Defendant voluntarily executed the agreements, paid significant deposits and undertook renovations and furnishing demonstrating possession; there was no reliable contemporaneous documentary evidence of any trust in favour of the Defendant; notices were served in accordance with the tenancy agreement; therefore the trial judge's finding that the Defendant breached the tenancy and the award of arrears (except 2013–2014 due to defective proof of service) and double rent was correct and should be affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Sessions Court affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Sessions Judge dated 23.8.2019 affirmed