Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 145 nlc

Legal area

Court

12 Apr 2023

1. ) Tan Kok Ching 2. ) Tan Soi Moi @ Tang Soi Moi 3. ) Tang Boey Chew 4. ) Tan Chang Seng 5. ) Tang Moi Ngoh 6. ) Tang Suk Hua @ Tang Mei Hwa Tang See Moi

Citation

CA-24NCvC-89-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CA-24NCvC-89-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Applicant entitled to relief under s.145 NLC: court may terminate co-proprietorship on application by any co-proprietor where others do not consent; amendment to s.141A does not prevent resort to s.145; on the affidavits the respondent did not consent and there was no bar to ordering termination and partition according to the proposed plan; court ordered termination, partition per plan, authorised registrars to sign documents and awarded costs RM3,000 to applicant.
9 Mar 2022

GHAZALI BIN YUSOFF 1. ) HASMAH BT DAUD 2. ) MOHD NASIR BIN ISMAIL

Citation

DA-24NCvC-310-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-24NCvC-310-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Application dismissed because plaintiff failed to prove the statutory precondition under s.145 NLC: there was no evidence that the proposed partition (Attachments A and B) had been specifically presented to all registered co‑owners and no evidence that any co‑owner would not join or consent; affidavits lacked particularity about attempts to obtain consent, and procedural protection of co‑owners' property rights required such notice and proof before court could exercise its discretion.
11 Dec 2020

1. VIGNESWARAN A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 2. THAENGESWARAN A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 3. SUBRAMANIAM A/L CHINNIAH 4. SOLAIYAMAH A/P CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 5. SELVI A/P CHINANAH CHETTIAR 6. ARASU A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR SARAWANA A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR

Citation

AA-24-1-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-24-1-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held it was necessary and expedient to order sale by public auction because the defendant had not shown present ability to purchase, failed to produce documentary evidence for alleged loan payments or renovation expenditure, the dispute created an impasse preventing plaintiffs enjoying their shares, and the proper mechanism to resolve co-ownership was a public sale at the agreed reserve price of RM250,000 with directions by the Senior Assistant Registrar; ancillary orders in Appendix 1 were granted to facilitate the sale.

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) Tan Kok Ching 2. ) Tan Soi Moi @ Tang Soi Moi 3. ) Tang Boey Chew 4. ) Tan Chang Seng 5. ) Tang Moi Ngoh 6. ) Tang Suk Hua @ Tang Mei Hwa Tang See Moi

GHAZALI BIN YUSOFF 1. ) HASMAH BT DAUD 2. ) MOHD NASIR BIN ISMAIL

1. VIGNESWARAN A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 2. THAENGESWARAN A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 3. SUBRAMANIAM A/L CHINNIAH 4. SOLAIYAMAH A/P CHINNIAH CHETTIAR 5. SELVI A/P CHINANAH CHETTIAR 6. ARASU A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR SARAWANA A/L CHINNIAH CHETTIAR