JACOB BIN SAHRI 1. ) MOHD AMIR BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) MOHD ASHRAF BIN MOHD HARIS

JACOB BIN SAHRI 1. ) MOHD AMIR BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) MOHD ASHRAF BIN MOHD HARIS

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate a cause of action in trespass: the impugned fences were within the respondents' plots as per the agreed subdivision plan and the appellant had not sought the statutory remedy under s.390 National Land Code for a right of way; therefore the Sessions...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BL-12ANCvC-11-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Jacob bin Sahri; Respondent: Mohd Amir bin Abdullah; Respondent: Mohd Ashraf bin Mohd Haris
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 November 2023
Case Number
BL-12ANCvC-11-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Strike Out Order Under Order 18 Rule 19 / Determination on Appeal (final Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Sessions Court dated 23.6.2023 affirmed.
Legal Topics
Right of Way (s.390 National Land Code), Trespass to Land, Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012, Injunctions, Beneficial Ownership and Trust Interests, Partition/land Subdivision
Land Law Property Law Civil Procedure Tort (trespass) Equity (trusts/beneficiaries) Right of Way (s.390 National Land Code) Trespass to Land Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012 +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jacob bin Sahri

Appellant

Mohd Amir bin Abdullah

Respondent

Mohd Ashraf bin Mohd Haris

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Strike Out Order Under Order 18 Rule 19 / Determination on Appeal (final Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff disclosed a cause of action for trespass
  2. 2 Whether the respondents lawfully erected fences within their plots and so did not trespass
  3. 3 Whether the action should have been struck out under Order 18 Rule 19 as bound to fail

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to demonstrate a cause of action in trespass: the impugned fences were within the respondents' plots as per the agreed subdivision plan and the appellant had not sought the statutory remedy under s.390 National Land Code for a right of way; therefore the Sessions Court correctly struck out the writ under Order 18 Rule 19 and its decision was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Sessions Court dated 23.6.2023 affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Sessions Court dated 23.6.2023 affirmed