1 SECURITY SERVICES SDN BHD BESTCOMP PLANTATION SDN. BHD.

1 SECURITY SERVICES SDN BHD BESTCOMP PLANTATION SDN. BHD.

Defendants did not demonstrate a registrable interest in the land under s 323 NLC because allegations of unpaid balance at best amount to a contractual right which is not a registrable interest; defendants also failed to commence prompt substantive proceedings and unreasonably delayed (several years), thereby prejudicing the registered proprietor. Therefore the private caveat was unjustified and must be set aside with costs.

Citation
NA-24NCvC-396-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Security Services Sdn. Bhd; First Defendant: Bestcomp Plantation Sdn. Bhd; Second Defendant: Lai Fo Ming
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 May 2024
Case Number
NA-24NCvC-396-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons to Remove Private Caveat (saman Pemula) / High Court Judgment (seremban) Dated 8 August 2024; Appeal Lodged by Defendants
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to set aside the private caveat allowed.
Legal Topics
Private Caveat, Caveatable Interest, Registrable Interest, Specific Performance, Allegations of Fraud
Source Language
Malay/English
Land Law Civil Procedure Private Caveat Caveatable Interest Registrable Interest Specific Performance Allegations of Fraud

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Security Services Sdn. Bhd

Plaintiff

Bestcomp Plantation Sdn. Bhd

First Defendant

Lai Fo Ming

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons to Remove Private Caveat (saman Pemula) / High Court Judgment (seremban) Dated 8 August 2024; Appeal Lodged by Defendants

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants had a caveatable (registrable) interest under s 323 National Land Code 1965
  2. 2 Whether an outstanding balance of purchase price creates a registrable interest sufficient to support a private caveat
  3. 3 Whether delay in commencing substantive proceedings justifies removal of the caveat

Ratio Decidendi

Defendants did not demonstrate a registrable interest in the land under s 323 NLC because allegations of unpaid balance at best amount to a contractual right which is not a registrable interest; defendants also failed to commence prompt substantive proceedings and unreasonably delayed (several years), thereby prejudicing the registered proprietor. Therefore the private caveat was unjustified and must be set aside with costs.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to set aside the private caveat allowed.

Orders

  • The private caveat entered by Lai Fo Ming on 15.12.2022 over GM3303 Lot 1211 Mukim Labu Bukit Kubang is set aside.
  • Costs awarded to the Plaintiff.