Pendaftar Hak Milik Negeri Selangor & 10 lagi Shaifulizam bin Mohd. Saleh & 1 lagi

Pendaftar Hak Milik Negeri Selangor & 10 lagi Shaifulizam bin Mohd. Saleh & 1 lagi

The Court held the Land Office was negligent for failing to follow mandatory NLC procedures and for deficient record-keeping which permitted a fraudster to obtain the final title; the bank did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care and was not negligent but the bank's charge was defeasible because the fraudster never possessed valid title as seller, therefore the registered charge is set aside; the bank is entitled to recover proven special damages (RM1,955,000) from the Land Office in personam.

Citation
B-01(NCVC)(W)-394-10/2016; B-01(NCVC)(W)-395-10/2016 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
3rd Defendant / Appellant (land Office): Pendaftar Hakmilik Negeri Selangor; 4th Defendant / Appellant (land Office): Pengarah Tanah dan Galian Selangor; 5th Defendant / Appellant (state): Kerajaan Negeri Selangor; 6th Defendant / Appellant (land Administrator Petaling): Pentadbir Tanah/Pejabat Daerah dan Tanah Petaling; 7th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Dato’ Zoal Azha bin Yusof; 8th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Dato’ Abdul Nasir bin Hassan; 9th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Dato’ Haji Kamarulzaman bin Jamil; 10th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Mazlan bin Md. Noor; 11th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Zulkepli bin Ahmad; 12th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Siti Lailatunazimah binti Muhamad Salam; 13th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee): Mohd. Nazrul bin Ngaimin; Plaintiff / Appellant (in Appeal 395): Shaifulizam bin Mohd. Saleh; 2nd Defendant / Respondent: Malayan Banking Berhad; Representative of Deceased 1st Defendant (registered Owner Transferee): Amanah Raya Berhad
Court
NCVC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 February 2020
Case Number
B-01(NCVC)(W)-394-10/2016; B-01(NCVC)(W)-395-10/2016 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Affirming in Part and Substituting High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal 394 by Land Office dismissed in part; Appeal 395 by plaintiff allowed; High Court order dated 29.8.2016 set aside and substituted.
Legal Topics
Indefeasibility of Title, Fraudulent Transfer, Conversion of Qualified Title to Final Title, Statutory Procedure Under National Land Code, Vicarious Liability and Negligence of Land Registry, Bona Fide Purchaser Doctrine, Damages in Personam Vs in Rem
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Property Law Tort (negligence) Banking Law Equity Indefeasibility of Title Fraudulent Transfer Conversion of Qualified Title to Final Title +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendaftar Hakmilik Negeri Selangor

3rd Defendant / Appellant (land Office)

Pengarah Tanah dan Galian Selangor

4th Defendant / Appellant (land Office)

Kerajaan Negeri Selangor

5th Defendant / Appellant (state)

Pentadbir Tanah/Pejabat Daerah dan Tanah Petaling

6th Defendant / Appellant (land Administrator Petaling)

Dato’ Zoal Azha bin Yusof

7th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Dato’ Abdul Nasir bin Hassan

8th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Dato’ Haji Kamarulzaman bin Jamil

9th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Mazlan bin Md. Noor

10th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Zulkepli bin Ahmad

11th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Siti Lailatunazimah binti Muhamad Salam

12th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Mohd. Nazrul bin Ngaimin

13th Defendant / Appellant (land Office Employee)

Shaifulizam bin Mohd. Saleh

Plaintiff / Appellant (in Appeal 395)

Malayan Banking Berhad

2nd Defendant / Respondent

Amanah Raya Berhad

Representative of Deceased 1st Defendant (registered Owner Transferee)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Affirming in Part and Substituting High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Land Office was negligent in handling title conversion and issuance
  2. 2 Whether Malayan Banking Berhad (the bank) was negligent in advancing funds and taking a charge
  3. 3 Whether the bank's registered charge is defeasible given the title was obtained by a fraudster

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the Land Office was negligent for failing to follow mandatory NLC procedures and for deficient record-keeping which permitted a fraudster to obtain the final title; the bank did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care and was not negligent but the bank's charge was defeasible because the fraudster never possessed valid title as seller, therefore the registered charge is set aside; the bank is entitled to recover proven special damages (RM1,955,000) from the Land Office in personam.

Court Disposition

Appeal 394 by Land Office dismissed in part; Appeal 395 by plaintiff allowed; High Court order dated 29.8.2016 set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • The plaintiff’s claims allowed as per specified prayers (a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(h) and (i) of Re-Amended Statement of Claim
  • The 2nd defendant’s registered charge in respect of the property is defeasible and set aside; property to be retransferred to the plaintiff