Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Declaratory relief

Legal area

Court

6 Apr 2026

1. ) CHUEN PUAT CHOOI REALTY SDN BHD 2. ) LIM YEW SEONG @ TAN YEW SEONG 1. ) MUTIARA JOHAN PROPERTIES SDN BHD 2. ) NICE PROPERTIES SDN BHD 3. ) MUTIARA GENTING JOINT MANAGEMENT BODY

Citation

WA-24NCvC-5491-11/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-5491-11/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court held that the Management Corporation came into existence by operation of law on 2 December 2015; the JMB may continue only in a limited transitional capacity under the SMA; the prolonged ten‑year delay in convening the 1st AGM was inconsistent with the statutory scheme; judicial intervention was warranted to compel completion of the statutory handover, while refusing to declare the JMB unlawful or dissolved ab initio.
6 Apr 2026

TAN KIAN ENG 1. ) TAN GUAT KWEE 2. ) TAN OH MOOI @ TAN GUAT HUA 3. ) TAN GUAT TAA 4. ) TAN AH RAN 5. ) TAN GUAT ENG 6. ) TAN GUAT NGO 7. ) TAN HAN BENG 8. ) SHING LIONG TRADING SDN. BHD.

Citation

JA-22NCvC-11-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCvC-11-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the plaintiff's documentary evidence including the 1987 trust deed and transaction records established a clear beneficial interest of 17,028/898,315 shares; defendants failed to disclose any bona fide triable defence or alternative factual computation; the alleged subsequent sale did not override the pre-existing beneficial interest nor did D9 prove bona fide purchaser without notice. Accordingly, summary judgment under Order 14 was appropriate and the court granted declaratory relief and mandatory and prohibitory injunctions together with costs RM8,000.
29 Jan 2026

ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (M) BERHAD 1. ) NORBIYAH BINTI MAT ARIS 2. ) RAHMAT BIN EMBONG

Citation

W-02(NCC)(A)-823-05/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCC
Case number

W-02(NCC)(A)-823-05/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the insurer failed to comply with the mandatory notice requirement in the proviso to s96(3) RTA 1987; therefore the declaratory order was of no effect as against the respondents, and the respondents were entitled to enforce the Sessions Court judgment against the insurer under s96(1) without filing separate recovery proceedings; High Court decision affirmed and appeal dismissed.
23 Jan 2026

KIRUBAKARAN A/L MUNIANDY 1. ) NADRAJAN A/L CHEN CHIAH 2. ) SUGUMARAN A/L KRISHNAN 3. ) AM GENERAL INSURANCE BERHAD

Citation

JA-12B-69-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-12B-69-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court finding that the appellant failed, on the balance of probabilities, to prove the involvement and negligence of the respondent riders; appellate interference was unwarranted because there was no plain error or insufficient appreciation of evidence; the Sessions Court's conditional quantum assessment was methodologically sound but remains academic given failure on liability; the insurer's claim for a declaratory judgment was dismissed as academic.
23 Jan 2026

EKVE SDN BHD 1. ) PENTADBIR TANAH, DAERAH GOMBAK 2. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI SELANGOR 3. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 4. ) PRISTINE POWER SDN BHD 5. ) CHRISTINE CHIN SIEW LIN

Citation

BA-21NCvC-31-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-21NCvC-31-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found on the balance of probabilities that the specified 0.0595 ha was validly acquired and vested in the State in 1995, was wrongly included in subsequent certified/final titles due to negligent and/or fraudulent conduct by the surveyor and certain land office officials and by Beverly Heights/Pristine Power; therefore the final title over PN119290 Lot 126868 is erroneous/defeasible and must be set aside, the relevant certified plan (PA235704) must be amended/excluded, and the 1st,2nd,3rd,6th and 7th defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay RM9,842,676.68 plus interest and…
23 Jan 2026

PRISTINE POWER SDN BHD 1. ) PENTADBIR TANAH, DAERAH GOMBAK 2. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK, SELANGOR 3. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR

Citation

BA-21NCvC-23-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-21NCvC-23-05/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found the Scheduled/Acquired Land had been validly acquired and vested in the State and was wrongly included in the 6th defendant’s final title due to negligent statutory conduct by the Land Administrator/Registrar/State Director and fraudulent/dishonest conduct by the 6th and 7th defendants; therefore the final title is erroneous/defeasible, declaratory relief and orders to amend PA235704 and set aside the final title were granted, EKVE has locus standi, the State is vicariously liable, and EKVE is entitled to damages of RM9,842,676.68 with interest…
14 Jan 2026

LEE TEIK AUN 1. ) MUJUR ZAMAN SDN BHD 2. ) MZ DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-515-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-515-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court determined as a matter of law that the Sale & Purchase Agreement was void under Section 223 and voidable under Section 293 because it was executed after the commencement of a winding up petition and constituted a contra transaction without valuable consideration within the twilight period; the contract was frustrated by the subsequent winding up under Section 57(2) Contracts Act 1950; and the plaintiff's claim was time-barred because the causes of action accrued by latest 15.12.2014 and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence to delay accrual under s29 — accordingly…
13 Jan 2026

1. ) PEMBINAAN LERCAST SDN. BHD 2. ) LERCAST ALDEWAY SDN. BHD. CHEK SAM BINTI SALLEH

Citation

P-02(NCvC)(W)-1311-08/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

P-02(NCvC)(W)-1311-08/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the High Court had erred in some factual appreciation but concluded the Project was no longer viable; applying its statutory powers under s69(4) Courts of Judicature Act 1964 the court declared the Joint Venture Agreement, Supplementary Agreement, Manager Agreement and Power of Attorney terminated forthwith, varied the High Court judgment accordingly and made consequential orders (return of title, removal of caveat, refund of the specified deposit, no damages awarded and parties to bear their own costs). The Supplemental Agreement's mutual termi…
2 Jan 2026

See Hong Cheen @ See Hong Chen 1. ) CHEE CHI NYEN 2. ) CHEE CHI VUI 3. ) CHEE CHI SENG 4. ) CHEE CHI VUN 5. ) LEE HYEN YAN 6. ) ANCHOR WAYS SDN. BHD. 7. ) ANGKASA TEKAD SDN. BHD. 8. ) ARENA USAHAJAYA SDN. BHD. 9. ) ASAS TUNAI SDN. BHD. 10.

Citation

WA-22NCC-344-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-344-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Kuala Lumpur suit was struck out because it was a later, duplicative action lacking any territorial or factual nexus to Kuala Lumpur; jurisdiction under s.23 CJA 1964 lay with the Kota Kinabalu High Court and the Kuala Lumpur filing amounted to abuse of process/forum shopping warranting summary disposal under Order 18 r.19 ROC 2012.
15 Dec 2025

YAP YEE HOO 1. ) MUJUR ZAMAN SDN. BHD. 2. ) MZ DEVELOPMENT SDN. BHD. 3. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 4. ) Kerajaan Negeri Selangor 5. ) PGCC ASSETS HOLDINGS SDN. BHD. 6. ) PARAGON PINNACLE SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-48-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-48-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The SPAs were executed after a winding‑up petition had been presented against the second defendant and no validation order was sought; accordingly the SPAs are void ab initio and cannot confer enforceable rights. The Plaintiff’s claim is founded on contract and was commenced more than six years after accrual, hence barred by section 6(1)(a) Limitation Act 1953. The Plaintiff’s general, unparticularised allegations of fraud do not satisfy section 29 and cannot displace the limitation bar. Combined, these legal defects render the claim plainly unsustainable and disclose no triable issue; Enclos…