AZURA BINTI IBRAHIM YUAN TRADING & AGENCY SDN BHD

AZURA BINTI IBRAHIM YUAN TRADING & AGENCY SDN BHD

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff (Azura) failed to prove that the PA contravened Section 10 of the Enactment or was procured by fraud; contemporaneous documents (cheques, statutory declaration, bank records) and witness evidence established receipt of the RM240,000.00 and rebutted the moneylending claim; the Agreement of 10.02.2020 validly conferred on Zaidi the right to purchase at RM300,000 after conditions were met, entitling Zaidi to specific performance and requiring Azura to execute transfer documents and deliver vacant possession.

Citation
KA-22NCvC-42-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (suit 42); 1st Defendant (suit 15): Azura Binti Ibrahim; Defendant (suit 42); 2nd Defendant (suit 15): Yuan Trading & Agency Sdn Bhd; Plaintiff (suit 15): Zaidi Bin Md Yusof
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 August 2025
Case Number
KA-22NCvC-42-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit (consolidated) / After Full Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim in Suit 42 dismissed with costs; Yuan Trading's counterclaim allowed as per para.19A(a),(c),(d) and (e) of Defence & Counterclaim; Zaidi's claim in Suit 15 for specific performance allowed with costs; Azura ordered to deliver vacant possession and execute transfer documents (Form 14A) within 30...
Legal Topics
Validity of Power of Attorney, Specific Performance, Illegality/moneylending, Fraud and Misrepresentation, Private Caveat, Return of Title Deed
Source Language
Malay/English
Property Law Contract Law Equity (specific Performance) Malay Reserve Land Law Moneylenders Law Civil Procedure Validity of Power of Attorney Specific Performance +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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Azura Binti Ibrahim

Plaintiff (suit 42); 1st Defendant (suit 15)

Yuan Trading & Agency Sdn Bhd

Defendant (suit 42); 2nd Defendant (suit 15)

Zaidi Bin Md Yusof

Plaintiff (suit 15)

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit (consolidated) / After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the irrevocable Power of Attorney (PA) contravenes Section 10 of the Kedah Malay Reserve Enactment
  2. 2 Whether the PA is void, invalid or unenforceable
  3. 3 Whether the RM240,000.00 advance constituted illegal moneylending under the Moneylenders Act 1951

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiff (Azura) failed to prove that the PA contravened Section 10 of the Enactment or was procured by fraud; contemporaneous documents (cheques, statutory declaration, bank records) and witness evidence established receipt of the RM240,000.00 and rebutted the moneylending claim; the Agreement of 10.02.2020 validly conferred on Zaidi the right to purchase at RM300,000 after conditions were met, entitling Zaidi to specific performance and requiring Azura to execute transfer documents and deliver vacant possession.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim in Suit 42 dismissed with costs; Yuan Trading's counterclaim allowed as per para.19A(a),(c),(d) and (e) of Defence & Counterclaim; Zaidi's claim in Suit 15 for specific performance allowed with costs; Azura ordered to deliver vacant possession and execute transfer documents (Form 14A) within 30...

Orders

  • Plaintiff in Suit 42 (Azura) claim dismissed with costs
  • Yuan Trading's counterclaim allowed as per para.19A(a),(c),(d) and (e) of the Defence & Counterclaim (Encl.6)