MAHATHIR BIN MUSTAFA POH KEE POU

MAHATHIR BIN MUSTAFA POH KEE POU

The appellate court found that the defendant established serious triable issues (long occupation since 2008, sale/assignment documentation, sustained payment of ground rent to the predecessor landlord, payment of assessment and utility bills) which disentitled the applicant to summary relief under Order 89; summary procedure was inappropriate and the High Court's decision in favour of the defendant was correct and must stand.

Citation
M-04(A)-149-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Applicant: Mahathir Bin Mustafa; Respondent / Defendant: Poh Kee Pou
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 March 2024
Case Number
M-04(A)-149-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal From High Court)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court decision in favour of respondent affirmed
Legal Topics
Summary Possession, Order 89 Rules of Court 2012, Tenancy/license, Triable Issues, Possession Dispute
Source Language
Malay/English
Property Law Land Law Civil Procedure Summary Possession Order 89 Rules of Court 2012 Tenancy/license Triable Issues Possession Dispute

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mahathir Bin Mustafa

Appellant / Applicant

Poh Kee Pou

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal From High Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant occupied the land/house with the licence or consent of the owner or was a trespasser
  2. 2 Whether the summary procedure under Order 89 was appropriate or whether there were triable issues requiring a full trial
  3. 3 Whether the documentary evidence (S&P, rent receipts, assessment and utility payments) established an arguable defence/successor in title

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court found that the defendant established serious triable issues (long occupation since 2008, sale/assignment documentation, sustained payment of ground rent to the predecessor landlord, payment of assessment and utility bills) which disentitled the applicant to summary relief under Order 89; summary procedure was inappropriate and the High Court's decision in favour of the defendant was correct and must stand.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court decision in favour of respondent affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • High Court decision allowing the respondent is affirmed