LAMAN REALITI SDN BHD 1. JIWA RAKYAT SDN BHD & 7 OTHERS

LAMAN REALITI SDN BHD 1. JIWA RAKYAT SDN BHD & 7 OTHERS

The 7th Defendant held registered title by court order and thus enjoyed statutory indefeasibility under s.340 NLC; the Plaintiff failed to particularise any role of the 7th Defendant in the alleged conspiracy and the pleaded facts undermined any inference of collusion; accordingly there was no reasonable cause of action against the 7th Defendant and the claim against him was struck out as plain and obvious, frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process.

Citation
WA-22NCVC-30-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: LAMAN REALIT! SDN BHD; 1st Defendant: JIWARAKYAT SDN BHD; 2nd Defendant: LIMAHLIM; 3rd Defendant: CHAN YONG SIN; 4th Defendant: CHIN NYUKPIN; 5th Defendant: LOH KOKLEONG; 6th Defendant: CHOW CHO TAI; 7th Defendant: RIMAU INDAH SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION); 8th Defendant: LOH KOK CHOY
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 December 2020
Case Number
WA-22NCVC-30-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil: Property/contract/tort (conspiracy to Defraud) / Application to Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 and Order 92 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012
Outcome
Application allowed; Plaintiff's claim against the 7th Defendant struck out
Legal Topics
Indefeasibility of Title, Specific Performance, Fraud and Conspiracy, Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Property Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Tort Conspiracy to Defraud Indefeasibility of Title Specific Performance Fraud and Conspiracy Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAMAN REALIT! SDN BHD

Plaintiff

JIWARAKYAT SDN BHD

1st Defendant

LIMAHLIM

2nd Defendant

CHAN YONG SIN

3rd Defendant

CHIN NYUKPIN

4th Defendant

LOH KOKLEONG

5th Defendant

CHOW CHO TAI

6th Defendant

RIMAU INDAH SDN BHD (IN LIQUIDATION)

7th Defendant

LOH KOK CHOY

8th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil: Property/contract/tort (conspiracy to Defraud) / Application to Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19 and Order 92 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 7th Defendant's title is indefeasible under section 340 National Land Code
  2. 2 Whether the 7th Defendant was involved in a conspiracy to defraud the Plaintiff
  3. 3 Whether the claim against the 7th Defendant is plain and obvious, frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process and should be struck out

Ratio Decidendi

The 7th Defendant held registered title by court order and thus enjoyed statutory indefeasibility under s.340 NLC; the Plaintiff failed to particularise any role of the 7th Defendant in the alleged conspiracy and the pleaded facts undermined any inference of collusion; accordingly there was no reasonable cause of action against the 7th Defendant and the claim against him was struck out as plain and obvious, frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; Plaintiff's claim against the 7th Defendant struck out

Orders

  • Strike out the Plaintiff's claim against the 7th Defendant under Order 18 Rule 19 and Order 92 Rule 4 Rules of Court 2012
  • Costs of RM3,000 awarded to the 7th Defendant