Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Bona fide purchaser for value without notice

Legal area

Court

16 Jan 2026

KHOO PI FONG CHUA CHER LENG

Citation

JA-24NCvC-627-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-24NCvC-627-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant possesses a caveatable interest by virtue of the 2/5 beneficial entitlement under the consent Decree; factual allegations and surrounding circumstances (including alleged deliberate default, plaintiff's role as director of the borrower and pending Suit 108) disclose a serious question to be tried; on balance of convenience the caveat must be maintained pending disposal of Suit 108, therefore plaintiff's application to remove the caveat is dismissed.
27 Nov 2025

1. ) ONG SANG HUAT 2. ) ONG SIONG WOON 1. ) TAI JIXIA 2. ) MANIFEST WEALTH MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-468-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-468-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiffs failed to prove on balance of probabilities that defendant second was a party to actual fraud or had knowledge of the unregistered decree nisi trust; because the trust was never registered under s.344 NLC it did not bind a purchaser who relied on the register; defendant second is a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, plaintiffs' substantive claims against it are dismissed; plaintiff second's caveat lodged after registration was wrongful and must be cancelled; defendant second entitled to nominal damages RM5,000, interest and costs RM20,000.
5 Mar 2024

EKO PROPERTY HOLDINGS SDN BHD 1. ) SOO JIA XUAN 2. ) SOO YAM HOONG

Citation

P-02(NCvC)(W)-338-03/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

P-02(NCvC)(W)-338-03/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On the balance of probabilities the court found plaintiffs paid the full purchase price and received vacant possession thereby making the vendor (D1) a bare trustee; the subsequent sale to D2 was void ab initio and the registration in D2's name was obtained by an instrument tainted as void/insufficient under s340(2)(b) NLC; D2, as an immediate purchaser, was not entitled to protection under the proviso to s340(3) and failed to prove bona fide status and adequate due diligence; therefore the Court of Appeal dismissed D2's appeal and affirmed the High Court judgment ordering costs.
24 Oct 2021

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the full balance of RM116,000 was paid to Mariah & Co; consequently Defendant 2 did not become a bare trustee. The transfer to Defendant 1 is valid and Defendant 1 holds indefeasible title under s340(1) KTN. The IPA is academic given the transfer and the Plaintiff's bankruptcy; Plaintiff's declarations sought are refused. Defendant 2 must account for and repay the RM80,000 received from Plaintiff to the Director General of Insolvency.
24 Oct 2021

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Citation

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCVC-53-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on balance that the outstanding RM116,000 was paid to defendant 2 (through Mariah & Co); absent proof of full payment the vendor did not become a bare trustee and defendant 2 was entitled to transfer to defendant 1; the IPA was rendered academic by the subsequent transfer and plaintiff's bankruptcy vested any residual rights in the DGI; therefore defendant 1 holds indefeasible title under s340(1) KTN and plaintiff's declarations fail.
19 Aug 2021

MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD (NO. SYARIKAT: 3813-K) 1. SPARROWS & ARROWS SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT: 242876-U) (DALAM LIKUIDASI) 2. KOPERASI KAKITANGAN PETRONAS BERHAD (KOOP INST. NO.: 14) 3. NGA HOCK CHEH 30 (BERAMAL ATAS NAMA DAN GAYA TETUAN NGA HOC

Citation

W-02(NCVC)(W)-413-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCVC
Case number

W-02(NCVC)(W)-413-03/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court admitted Kopetro’s further evidence but held MBB failed to prove any fraud, misrepresentation, forgery or unlawful acquisition under s.340(2) NLC and had not protected its unregistered interest; Kopetro was a bona fide purchaser whose registered title was indefeasible; claims against the solicitors for abuse of process and conspiracy/fraud were not made out; appeal dismissed and High Court judgment affirmed.
23 Jul 2020

JASMAIR SINGH A/L PAJAN SINGH 1. ) BIR SINGH A/L TEJA SINGH 2. ) PARMINDER KAUR A/P KAMIKER SINGH (Practising under the name and sytle PARMINDER K & ASSOCIATES) 3. ) GUNASEELAN A/L THINAKARAN 4. ) UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BERHAD

Citation

WA-12BNCVC-121-07/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BNCVC-121-07/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appellant failed to prove forgery or lack of knowledge of the sale on the balance of probabilities because expert chemist reports were unreliable and procedurally defective, key witnesses and documents undermined appellant's account, D4 acted in accordance with normal practice and sent correspondence to appellant's address, and D3 acquired indefeasible title as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice; accordingly appeal dismissed.
22 Nov 2019

1. ) MAK YAN TAI 2. ) MAK KHUM PHO 1. ) CHIA MOY KING 2. ) PARAGON CAPACITY SDN BHD 3. ) SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCVC-291-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCVC-291-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The 3rd Defendant’s strike-out application was dismissed because the Statement of Claim, read without affidavit evidence, disclosed a reasonable cause of action and raised substantial disputed questions of law and fact (including alleged illegality/forgery in transfers and effect of setting aside the JID) that required full trial and viva voce evidence; the claims were not scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process, so summary striking out was inappropriate.