LIM AH SOON 1. TAMIL ARASI A/P M. KATHIRESAN CHEETTIAR 2. PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH KUALA MUDA

LIM AH SOON 1. TAMIL ARASI A/P M. KATHIRESAN CHEETTIAR 2. PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH KUALA MUDA

The Land Administrator's order dated 26/2/2020 was unlawful and unreasonable because he failed to take into account an available alternative access over Lot 51 owned by the First Defendant, thereby breaching the requirements of sections 389 and 390 NLC and established caselaw; the order is set aside and the First Defendant's application for a private right of way through Lot 1 is dismissed.

Citation
KA-24NCvC-273-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Lim Ah Soon; First Defendant: Tamil Arasi a/p M. Kathiresan Cheettiar; Second Defendant: Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Kuala Muda
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 July 2021
Case Number
KA-24NCvC-273-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
National Land Code S390 Right of Way Application Appeal / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Decision of the Land Administrator dated 26/2/2020 set aside; application for a Land Administrator's private right of way by the First Defendant through Lot 1 dismissed.
Legal Topics
Land Administrator Right of Way, Section 390 NLC, Alternative Access, Reasonableness Review, Compensation
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Administrative Law Land Administrator Right of Way Section 390 NLC Alternative Access Reasonableness Review Compensation

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lim Ah Soon

Plaintiff

Tamil Arasi a/p M. Kathiresan Cheettiar

First Defendant

Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Kuala Muda

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

National Land Code S390 Right of Way Application Appeal / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Land Administrator lawfully and reasonably created a private right of way under s390 NLC over the Plaintiff's land
  2. 2 Whether the Land Administrator failed to consider an available alternative access over land owned by the Applicant
  3. 3 Whether the creation of the right of way resulted in unjust enrichment and disproportionate prejudice to the Plaintiff

Ratio Decidendi

The Land Administrator's order dated 26/2/2020 was unlawful and unreasonable because he failed to take into account an available alternative access over Lot 51 owned by the First Defendant, thereby breaching the requirements of sections 389 and 390 NLC and established caselaw; the order is set aside and the First Defendant's application for a private right of way through Lot 1 is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Decision of the Land Administrator dated 26/2/2020 set aside; application for a Land Administrator's private right of way by the First Defendant through Lot 1 dismissed.

Orders

  • Decision of the Land Administrator dated 26/2/2020 set aside in toto
  • Application by First Defendant for a Land Administrator's private right of way through Lot 1 dismissed