SU’OT TEBARI @ SALI TEBARI [SUING ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND 3 OF HIS SIBLINGS] 1. ) SUPERINTENDENT OF LAND & SURVEY, LIMBANG DIVISION 2. ) STATE GOVERNMENT OF SARAWAK 3. ) LAND CUSTODY & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

SU’OT TEBARI @ SALI TEBARI [SUING ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND 3 OF HIS SIBLINGS] 1. ) SUPERINTENDENT OF LAND & SURVEY, LIMBANG DIVISION 2. ) STATE GOVERNMENT OF SARAWAK 3. ) LAND CUSTODY & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the disputed lots were cultivated and in continuous possession prior to 1 January 1958 because credible photographic/aerial evidence (1948, 1958) and settlement records contradicted oral history and Map 'M'; the High Court's unreasoned finding of NCR was unsafe and must be set aside; therefore plaintiff's appeal is dismissed and appeals by Government and LCDA are allowed; insofar as Lot 349 is alienated, indefeasible title to LCDA stands and rectification would not be an available remedy even if NCR were established (remedy would be damages).

Citation
Q-01(NCvC)(W)-654-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Respondent (in CA Nos. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021 & Q 01(ncvc)(w) 672 11/2021) / Plaintiff (high Court): SU’OT TEBARI @ SALI TEBARI; Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021) / 1st Defendant (high Court): SUPERINTENDENT OF LAND AND SURVEY, LIMBANG DIVISION; Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021) / 2nd Defendant (high Court): STATE GOVERNMENT OF SARAWAK; Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 672 11/2021) / 3rd Defendant (high Court): LAND CUSTODY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (LCDA)
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 December 2025
Case Number
Q-01(NCvC)(W)-654-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeals From High Court (native Customary Rights / Land) / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition on Appeals Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654/671/672 11/2021)
Outcome
Appeal Q-01(NCVC)(W)-654-11/2021 (plaintiff Su'ot) dismissed; Appeals Q-01(NCVC)(W)-671-11/2021 (Government) and Q-01(NCVC)(W)-672-11/2021 (LCDA) allowed.
Legal Topics
Native Customary Rights (ncr), Sarawak Land Code Interpretation (s2, S5, S10, S84 96, S95, S102, S202), Settlement Orders and Notice, Indefeasibility of Title, Limitation and Public Authorities Protection Act 1948, Admissibility and Weight of Aerial Photographic Evidence, Representative Action
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Native Customary Rights Administrative Law Property Law Native Customary Rights (ncr) Sarawak Land Code Interpretation (s2, S5, S10, S84 96, S95, S102, S202) Settlement Orders and Notice Indefeasibility of Title +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SU’OT TEBARI @ SALI TEBARI

Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Respondent (in CA Nos. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021 & Q 01(ncvc)(w) 672 11/2021) / Plaintiff (high Court)

SUPERINTENDENT OF LAND AND SURVEY, LIMBANG DIVISION

Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021) / 1st Defendant (high Court)

STATE GOVERNMENT OF SARAWAK

Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 671 11/2021) / 2nd Defendant (high Court)

LAND CUSTODY AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (LCDA)

Respondent (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654 11/2021) and Appellant (in CA No. Q 01(ncvc)(w) 672 11/2021) / 3rd Defendant (high Court)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeals From High Court (native Customary Rights / Land) / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition on Appeals Q 01(ncvc)(w) 654/671/672 11/2021)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are natives of Sarawak
  2. 2 Whether claimants acquired native customary rights (NCR) over Field Lots 349, 682, 702 and 722
  3. 3 Whether any extinguishment of NCR occurred prior to alienation/issuance of lease

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the disputed lots were cultivated and in continuous possession prior to 1 January 1958 because credible photographic/aerial evidence (1948, 1958) and settlement records contradicted oral history and Map 'M'; the High Court's unreasoned finding of NCR was unsafe and must be set aside; therefore plaintiff's appeal is dismissed and appeals by Government and LCDA are allowed; insofar as Lot 349 is alienated, indefeasible title to LCDA stands and rectification would not be an available remedy even if NCR were established (remedy would be damages).

Court Disposition

Appeal Q-01(NCVC)(W)-654-11/2021 (plaintiff Su'ot) dismissed; Appeals Q-01(NCVC)(W)-671-11/2021 (Government) and Q-01(NCVC)(W)-672-11/2021 (LCDA) allowed.

Orders

  • Appeal Q-01(NCVC)(W)-654-11/2021 dismissed with no order as to costs
  • Appeal Q-01(NCVC)(W)-671-11/2021 allowed with costs of RM30000 here and below awarded to the Government