LEE KEAN CHOON 1. ) KHOO SAN 2. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 3. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang

LEE KEAN CHOON 1. ) KHOO SAN 2. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 3. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang

Although the Court found the substituted service effected by the Third Respondent was irregular and premature, the appellant was deemed to have been informed of the partition decision in early March 2021; the three-month statutory appeal period under section 418 NLC therefore began then and the appellant's originating summons was filed out of time; consequently the High Court's dismissal of the originating summons and findings on the counterclaim are affirmed.

Citation
B-01(NCvC)(A)-776-10/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Lee Kean Choon; First Respondent: Khoo San; Second Respondent: Pengarah Tanah dan Galian Negeri Selangor; Third Respondent: Pentadbir Tanah Klang
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 December 2024
Case Number
B-01(NCvC)(A)-776-10/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From High Court / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal Against Dismissal of Originating Summons and Counterclaim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed
Legal Topics
Partition of Land, Co Proprietorship, Frustration of Contract, Service of Process, Limitation/appeal Period Under National Land Code
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Contract Law Property Law Partition of Land Co Proprietorship Frustration of Contract +2 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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lee Kean Choon

Appellant

Khoo San

First Respondent

Pengarah Tanah dan Galian Negeri Selangor

Second Respondent

Pentadbir Tanah Klang

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From High Court / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal Against Dismissal of Originating Summons and Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substituted service under section 432 NLC was valid
  2. 2 When the three-month appeal period under section 418 NLC commences
  3. 3 Whether the 1971 agreement was frustrated by subsequent land acquisition and partition

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court found the substituted service effected by the Third Respondent was irregular and premature, the appellant was deemed to have been informed of the partition decision in early March 2021; the three-month statutory appeal period under section 418 NLC therefore began then and the appellant's originating summons was filed out of time; consequently the High Court's dismissal of the originating summons and findings on the counterclaim are affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the learned High Court Judge affirmed