1. ) Makhtar Bin Mat 2. ) Hasbullah Bin Mat 3. ) Che Ghani Bin Mohamad Zariah Binti Muhamad

1. ) Makhtar Bin Mat 2. ) Hasbullah Bin Mat 3. ) Che Ghani Bin Mohamad Zariah Binti Muhamad

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the fingerprint expert's court‑ordered comparison (P1) that the thumbprints on P2 and P3 were not those of the deceased but matched a different person; P2 and P3 are therefore forged, the transfers effected by them are void, indefeasibility under s340 is defeated,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
DA-22NCvC-6-01/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Mahktar bin Mat; Plaintiff: Hasbullah bin Mat; Plaintiff: Che Ghani bin Mohamad; Defendant: Zariah binti Muhammad
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 January 2022
Case Number
DA-22NCvC-6-01/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Land/title Dispute (challenge to Registered Transfers) / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiffs' claims allowed. Court declared the two Powers of Attorney dated 11 August 2016 (P2 and P3) to be forged and void; transfers based on them to the defendant are null and void; plaintiffs entitled to reliefs restoring title to the deceased/estate as pleaded.
Legal Topics
Indefeasibility of Title, Forgery of Documents, Particulars of Fraud in Pleadings, Admissibility of Expert Report, Fingerprint Comparison Evidence, Locus Standi of Beneficiaries, Adverse Inference Under S114 Evidence Act
Land Law Evidence Civil Procedure Criminal Procedure (forensic Reports) Succession/estate Law Forgery/fraud Indefeasibility of Title Forgery of Documents +5 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 6 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahktar bin Mat

Plaintiff

Hasbullah bin Mat

Plaintiff

Che Ghani bin Mohamad

Plaintiff

Zariah binti Muhammad

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Land/title Dispute (challenge to Registered Transfers) / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the two Powers of Attorney dated 11 August 2016 (P2 and P3) were forged
  2. 2 Whether the subsequent transfers to the defendant are void and registration should be cancelled
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiffs sufficiently pleaded particulars of fraud

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the fingerprint expert's court‑ordered comparison (P1) that the thumbprints on P2 and P3 were not those of the deceased but matched a different person; P2 and P3 are therefore forged, the transfers effected by them are void, indefeasibility under s340 is defeated, plaintiffs as beneficiaries have equitable interest and locus standi to seek declaratory reliefs, and an adverse inference under s114 was warranted for failure to call the material witness; consequential reliefs and costs were granted.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' claims allowed. Court declared the two Powers of Attorney dated 11 August 2016 (P2 and P3) to be forged and void; transfers based on them to the defendant are null and void; plaintiffs entitled to reliefs restoring title to the deceased/estate as pleaded.

Orders

  • Declare Surat Kuasa Wakil dated 11 August 2016 registered as No. 2093/16 and No. 1912/16 to be forged and void
  • Declare the transfers (Borang 14A) effected pursuant to P2 and P3 and registrations transferring Lots 508 GM3414, 2528 GM2138, 521 GM213 and 592 GM806 to the defendant to be null and void