Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Double rent (holding over)

Legal area

Court

30 May 2025

FLAGSHIP BUILDERS SDN BHD 1. ) OLYMPIA FITNESS SOLUTION 2. ) YOGESWARAN A/L SUBRAMANIAM

Citation

JA-A52NCvC-84-03/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-A52NCvC-84-03/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

D1 is not a separate legal entity so claim against D1 dismissed; liability rests with D2 who signed the sale and lease. Plaintiff proved on balance of probabilities that D2 breached lease obligations by failing to pay rent and utilities, validly terminated the lease after issuing notices, forfeited the RM26,000 security deposit per express lease clauses, incurred reasonable repair costs RM24,000, and is entitled to recover unpaid rent, utilities and double rent for the period of holding over. COVID-19 Act s7, force majeure and frustration defences fail because the lease was entered during PKP…
9 Aug 2024

1. ) HORIZON GLOBAL SDN. BHD. 2. ) SHANKARA PILLAI A/L RAMANATHAN 3. ) SANJEEV KUMAR RAMASAMY ATRIA SHOPPING GALLERY SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-12A-59-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12A-59-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found no admissible evidence that the landlord consented to the tenant holding over; the representation alleged by appellants was unproven and amounted to a bare allegation. The Tenancy Agreement and contemporaneous documents supported the respondent's computation of outstanding sums. Under s28(4)(a) Civil Law Act the landlord validly exercised the option to charge double rent where possession was not given up without consent. Summary judgment was therefore properly entered and the appeal was dismissed with costs.
3 Feb 2023

1. ) WONG CHIU CHEE 2. ) LAI CHING KEONG CHAN PHUI MUN

Citation

BH-A72NCvC-32-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH-A72NCvC-32-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Defendant failed to prove breach of s.5.03 of the Tenancy Agreement and thus was not justified in withholding rent or in the counter-claim; plaintiffs entitled to unpaid rent (RM3,252), double rent for period of holding over on pro-rata basis (RM4,000) and restoration costs (RM1,300); defendant’s counter-claim and claims for aggravated, punitive and general damages dismissed; costs awarded to plaintiffs according to scale.
15 Jul 2022

LEE YEIN YEIN SS EMPIRE FOOD CONNECTIONS SDN BHD

Citation

BK-A52NCvC-12-01/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BK-A52NCvC-12-01/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Defendant failed to raise a triable issue on affidavit or evidence; breaches occurred before COVID-19 Act commenced so the Act and s.7 do not excuse performance absent specific factual proof; notices and termination complied with the Tenancy Agreement; summary judgment was therefore appropriate and granted for the plaintiff with costs on an indemnity basis.

Malaysia Case Law

FLAGSHIP BUILDERS SDN BHD 1. ) OLYMPIA FITNESS SOLUTION 2. ) YOGESWARAN A/L SUBRAMANIAM

1. ) HORIZON GLOBAL SDN. BHD. 2. ) SHANKARA PILLAI A/L RAMANATHAN 3. ) SANJEEV KUMAR RAMASAMY ATRIA SHOPPING GALLERY SDN. BHD.

1. ) WONG CHIU CHEE 2. ) LAI CHING KEONG CHAN PHUI MUN

LEE YEIN YEIN SS EMPIRE FOOD CONNECTIONS SDN BHD