Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Land acquisition

Legal area

Court

23 Feb 2026

KCSB KONSORTIUM SDN BHD 1. ) Kerajaan Negeri Johor 2. ) JOHOR CORPORATION

Citation

JA-21NCvC-21-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-21NCvC-21-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The writ and statement of claim dated 13.12.2024 constitute an abuse of process by substantial duplication of issues already the subject of active proceedings (SP 1017 and JR 41); therefore the action is struck out under Order 18 r 19(1)(d) KKM 2012 to prevent multiplicity, conflicting decisions and misuse of court process. The court did not decide the substantive merits of the underlying claims.
16 Feb 2026

ISMAIL BIN MAMAT 1. ) Pentadbir Tanah Besut 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Terengganu 3. ) Jabatan Ketua Pengarah Tanah & Galian (JKPTG)

Citation

TA-24-2-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

TA-24-2-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The surrender was valid and effective because the Plaintiff voluntarily applied for surrender in 2017 pursuant to MMKN conditions that predated the acquisition; the delayed memorial in 2022 was an administrative deficiency that did not establish bad faith sufficient to invalidate the surrender; the Plaintiff's registered proprietorship was defeasible by his prior undertaking so he was not entitled to compensation for the subject lot; procedural non-compliance under section 198(4) warranted procedural remedies but did not void the surrender or entitle the Plaintiff to substantive relief.
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…
31 Dec 2025

Azhar Bin Sulaiman Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Kota Setar

Citation

KA-15-39-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-15-39-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court held the appropriate valuation method for the subject building was the cost method calibrated by local comparable building costs and official valuation data; the applicant's high reconstruction cost claims based on contractor quotations and asserted heritage premium were rejected for lack of statutory heritage listing and insufficient qualified expert evidence. The respondent's 50% depreciation was excessive given the building's good condition; a 10% depreciation was appropriate. Court awarded RM292,656.24 for the building and ordered additional payments and ancillary directions accordi…
15 Dec 2025

SANDRAMADI D/O ADAIKAN 1. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Raub, Pahang Darul Makmur 2. ) Pengarah Tanah Dan Galian Pahang, Pahang Darul Makmur

Citation

CB-21NCvC-6-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-21NCvC-6-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence the court found the statutory acquisition process under the Land Acquisition Enactment (Cap. 140) was carried out and memorials and official records in the Land Office supported completion; plaintiff failed to discharge burden under s.101 Evidence Act to prove acquisition was not completed or that entries were fraudulent; applying presumption of regularity under s.114(e) Evidence Act the court held the acquisition valid and dismissed the plaintiff's claim with costs RM10,000.
25 Sept 2025

PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI KEDAH Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Padang Terap

Citation

KA-15-32-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-15-32-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court accepted the joint assessors' report, found the Land Administrator's valuation understated, recalculated owner's interest by properly apportioning the leasehold phases and reversion value, substituted the injurious affection award with a severance award to avoid double recovery, maintained early entry award, and increased the compensation accordingly with interest at 5% per annum from Form K date until full settlement.
26 Aug 2025

PNSB ACMAR SDN BHD 1. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 2. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang 3. ) PEGAWAI KEWANGAN NEGERI SELANGOR PENCELAH PRASARANA MALAYSIA BHD

Citation

BA-25-115-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-115-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The proposed intervener lacks the requisite legal standing and enforceable legal interest to intervene in proceedings that are confined to enforcement of a final and perfected judgment between the Applicant and governmental Respondents; res judicata and finality bar the proposed intervener's repeated attempts and the intervention application is dismissed with costs.
4 Jul 2025

1. ) ZAINAB BINTI ALIAS 2. ) SUHANA BINTI REDZWAN 3. ) IBRAHIM BIN KHALIL 4. ) MOHD HAMDAN BIN MOHD ADNAN 5. ) RAFIDAH BINTI IBRAHIM 6. ) MOHD AZMI BIN MOHD SHAH 7. ) HAMIDAH BINTI HAMZAH 8. ) ZULKIFLI BIN RAMLI 9. ) SYAZRIN DINIE BIN IBRAH

Citation

WA-24NCvC-3101-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-3101-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found respondent proved the special damages via documentary evidence (invoices and bills) and that the interim injunction caused measurable prejudice to the redevelopment project; therefore awarded the claimed special damages totalling RM584,523.00 (legal fees RM543,076.00 and idling costs RM41,447.00), awarded aggravated/exemplary damages of RM50,000.00 per applicant, ordered interest at 5% per annum from date of order until full settlement, and made no order as to costs.
28 Apr 2025

1. ) Dato' Jitendra Chhotalal Doshi 2. ) KIRON CHHOTALAL DOSHI 1. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 2. ) Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Gombak 3. ) MALAYSIA RAIL LINK SDN BHD PENCELAH China Communications Construction (ECRL) Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-25-52-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-25-52-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Leave dismissed because the challenge to the land area stated in the Form D was premature: Form D is provisional ('anggaran') and not a final decision on area; the appropriate forum is the Land Administrator's inquiry and award (Form G); applicants failed to disclose an arguable case at leave stage and alternative statutory remedies were available.