Tegas Sejati Sdn Bhd 1. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat 2. ) Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia

Tegas Sejati Sdn Bhd 1. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat 2. ) Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia

LLM, as paymaster and corporation undertaking works of public utility, filed Form N in time and is a 'person interested' under s 37(1)/(3) LAA (pre-amendment) and had locus standi to be party to the land reference; the High Court's refusal to strike out and its substantive findings were not plainly wrong; assessors...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
B-01(IM)-2-01/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Tegas Sejati Sdn. Bhd.; First Respondent: Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat; Second Respondent: Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia
Court
IM
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 July 2022
Case Number
B-01(IM)-2-01/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (consolidated Land Reference) / Court of Appeal Final Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals by appellant dismissed; cross-appeal by second respondent allowed in part
Legal Topics
Compulsory Acquisition, Land Acquisition Compensation, Locus Standi (person Interested), Form N Requirements, Assessors' Opinions (s 40 C), Striking Out, Stare Decisis, Restitution/refund
Land Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Appellate Procedure Compulsory Acquisition Land Acquisition Compensation Locus Standi (person Interested) Form N Requirements +4 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tegas Sejati Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant

Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Hulu Langat

First Respondent

Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (consolidated Land Reference) / Court of Appeal Final Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia (LLM) as paymaster had locus standi under s 37 LAA to file Form N and be party to land reference
  2. 2 Whether High Court erred in refusing to strike out LLM's reference
  3. 3 Whether assessors' written opinions complied with s 40C LAA

Ratio Decidendi

LLM, as paymaster and corporation undertaking works of public utility, filed Form N in time and is a 'person interested' under s 37(1)/(3) LAA (pre-amendment) and had locus standi to be party to the land reference; the High Court's refusal to strike out and its substantive findings were not plainly wrong; assessors provided written opinions and judge recorded them satisfying s 40C; appellant failed to plead additional heads in Form N so those claims were dismissed as not properly before the Court; cross-appeal succeeded to order refund of excess sum (RM31,162,177.64) with interest.

Court Disposition

Appeals by appellant dismissed; cross-appeal by second respondent allowed in part

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed (both appeals)
  • Cross-appeal allowed: appellant ordered to refund RM31,162,177.64 to second respondent with interest