Gan Ka Seng 1. ) Tan Weng Giap 2. ) P RAVECHANDRAN A/L S PERUMAL 3. ) SATHI DEVI A/P N. VALLIAPPAN 4. ) SEMUA ORANG YANG MENDUDUKI DI ATAS HARTANAH PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS TETUAN WOON WEE YUEN

Gan Ka Seng 1. ) Tan Weng Giap 2. ) P RAVECHANDRAN A/L S PERUMAL 3. ) SATHI DEVI A/P N. VALLIAPPAN 4. ) SEMUA ORANG YANG MENDUDUKI DI ATAS HARTANAH PIHAK YANG DIGARNIS TETUAN WOON WEE YUEN

Applying the Mahmood Ooyub indicia to the evidence the court found the 27.8.2014 sale was a sham to disguise illegal moneylending; the redemption and transfer to D2 was unlawful and therefore defeasible under s340(2)(c) National Land Code; D1 failed to prove bona fide purchaser status under s340(3); accordingly the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
JA-B52NCvC-90-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff (gs90); Defendant (gs102): Gan Ka Seng; Defendant: Tan Weng Giap; Plaintiff (gs102); Defendant (gs90): P Ravechandran a/l S Perumal; Plaintiff (gs102); Defendant (gs90): Sathi Devi a/p N. Valliappan; Defendant: Tetuan Woon Wee Yuen & Partners; Solicitor for Purchaser(s): Tetuan Tng, Liew, David Leow & Co.; Third Party (intermediary): Tetuan Syarikat Rodziah
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 May 2025
Case Number
JA-B52NCvC-90-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment (full Trial)
Outcome
GS 102: Plaintiffs' claims allowed in part; GS 90: Plaintiff's claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Sham Transactions, Illegal Moneylending, Void for Illegality, Bona Fide Purchaser for Value, Punitive Damages, Professional Negligence/fraud by Solicitors
Property Law Contract Law Fraud Land Registration Regulatory (moneylenders Act) Sham Transactions Illegal Moneylending Void for Illegality +3 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gan Ka Seng

Plaintiff (gs90); Defendant (gs102)

Tan Weng Giap

Defendant

P Ravechandran a/l S Perumal

Plaintiff (gs102); Defendant (gs90)

Sathi Devi a/p N. Valliappan

Plaintiff (gs102); Defendant (gs90)

Tetuan Woon Wee Yuen & Partners

Defendant

Tetuan Tng, Liew, David Leow & Co.

Solicitor for Purchaser(s)

Tetuan Syarikat Rodziah

Third Party (intermediary)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment (full Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 27.8.2014 sale agreement was a sham designed to mask illegal moneylending
  2. 2 Whether the redemption and subsequent transfer to D2 created indefeasible title or was void/defeasible under s340(2)(c) National Land Code
  3. 3 Whether D1 (subsequent purchaser) is a bona fide purchaser for value and entitled to protection under s340(3) NLC

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Mahmood Ooyub indicia to the evidence the court found the 27.8.2014 sale was a sham to disguise illegal moneylending; the redemption and transfer to D2 was unlawful and therefore defeasible under s340(2)(c) National Land Code; D1 failed to prove bona fide purchaser status under s340(3); accordingly the 2014 transfer and the subsequent transfer to D1 are void for illegality and must be set aside; plaintiffs entitled to rectification and punitive damages for defendants' fraudulent conduct.

Court Disposition

GS 102: Plaintiffs' claims allowed in part; GS 90: Plaintiff's claim dismissed

Orders

  • Declare that the Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 27.8.2014 (the first SPA) was a sham, void and of no legal effect
  • Declare that the redemption and transfer of the property to D2 was unlawful and defeasible under s340(2)(c) National Land Code and set aside the transfer to D2