Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Holding over

Legal area

Court

10 Apr 2026

TOP SPEED PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SDN. BHD. VMALL ENTERPRISE SDN. BHD.

Citation

BA-22NCvC-250-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-250-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Although a lawful monthly tenancy arose after expiry, the Plaintiff failed to prove that the Written Tenancy’s onerous clauses continued, failed to give a valid effective notice to quit, and by its subsequent conduct (accepting payments and issuing rental invoices) undermined any claim that the Defendant was an unlawful holdover; therefore prerequisites for double rent and lawful forfeiture were not established and the deposits must be returned.
19 Dec 2025

1. ) THURAISINGAM A/L PITCHAY MARIE 2. ) PUSPOM A/P PITCHAY MARIE CHEAH EWE HUAT

Citation

PA-11BNCvC-5-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-11BNCvC-5-07/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Magistrate: the plaintiff, as registered proprietor registered on 28.6.2016, holds an indefeasible title under Section 340 NLC; prior proceedings did not operate as res judicata because they involved different parties, were enforcement or procedural dismissals or did not reach a full trial on merits; the defendants occupied the premises without consent or payment after tenancy expiry and after transfer and therefore were trespassers; accordingly the plaintiff is entitled to immediate vacant possession and to general damages for trespass (subject to assessment); app…
16 Dec 2025

BANDAR UTAMA CITY ASSETS SDN. BHD. 1. ) ROTOL FOOD-CHAIN (M) SDN. BHD. 2. ) Chua Kah Seng 3. ) Caleen Chua Yen Keng

Citation

BA-12A-27-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12A-27-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

There was a serious triable issue whether the Tenant validly exercised the conditional renewal option (dependent on absence of arrears and performance of obligations); damages would not be an adequate remedy for the Tenant because premature eviction could be irreversible; the balance of convenience favoured preserving possession pending trial; therefore the Sessions Court correctly granted an interlocutory injunction and the appeal was dismissed.
26 Nov 2025

ORCHARD CIRCLE SDN BHD 1. ) LEE KIM KOK 2. ) CHIN WEI KIEN 3. ) ONG TAI SING PENCELAH Fortune Venture Managment Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-22NCvC-212-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-212-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found tenancy was renewed by conduct (rent payments and post-expiry acts), Plaintiff proved outstanding arrears of RM593,431.29 as at 30.9.2018, vacant possession was delivered by end January 2019 so the double rent claim fails, but Defendants must pay rental for the extension period 1.10.2018–30.1.2019 (RM174,800.00); awarded post-judgment interest at 5% on sums awarded and costs RM20,000.00.
10 Sept 2025

1. ) TAN KEAN HOCK 2. ) TAN HONG POO @ TAN HONG POH 1. ) GAJJAN SINGH A/L BHAN SINGH PANNU 2. ) PENGHUNI-PENGHUNI DAN/ATAU PENDUDUK-PENDUDUK premis No. 27 (Tingkat Bawah & 27A (Tingkat Satu) Jalan Haji Salleh, 51000 Sentul, Kuala Lumpur.

Citation

WA-A52NCvC-991-11/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-A52NCvC-991-11/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The first defendant was found to be the monthly tenant (not merely a company occupant); the Notice to Quit addressed to him was valid because he did not challenge being named and evidence (draft agreement and conduct) showed he occupied and paid rent; he sublet without consent and failed to procure vacation by sub-tenants; consequently plaintiffs were entitled to summary judgment for vacant possession and to recover mesne profits/double rent under s.28(4)(a) Civil Law Act 1956; no triable issue existed.
30 Jul 2025

KAM SWEE KEONG 1. ) LOW WEN LOONG 2. ) EE INN LIAN

Citation

BA-12B-125-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-125-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The option clause was binding and limited post-term rent to RM4,200; the Respondents breached that clause by unilaterally increasing rent to RM4,700; the Appellant attended on 1 May 2024 ready to surrender and pay but was prevented by the Respondents' non-attendance, so the Appellant did not unjustifiably hold over; therefore section 28(4)(a) CLA did not apply and the Respondents must return the deposit balance of RM7,800 plus costs of RM5,000 (subject to allocatur).
23 Jul 2025

1. ) VITAL LIVING EMPIRE SDN BHD 2. ) SASHITHERAN A/L KANAGASABAPATHI 3. ) VIGNESWARAN A/L AH WALI ELEGANT GROUP SDN BHD

Citation

WA-12ANCvC-16-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCvC-16-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Sessions Court was plainly wrong to order summary judgment because the Plaintiffs had pleaded fraud/misrepresentation and contested formation of a Second Contract (LGI) which raised genuine triable issues that could not be resolved summarily, and therefore the counterclaim required full trial; failure to file an opposing affidavit did not negate the sufficiency of the pleadings to raise triable issues.
16 Apr 2025

SWIFT LOGISTICS YARD SDN BHD NORTH WEST DEPOH SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-427-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-427-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendant failed to prove any oral collateral agreement, alleged representations or the asserted RM6,000,000 expenditure; written tenancy terms governed (parol evidence rule) and therefore the Defendant is a tenant holding over on an expired tenancy; counterclaim for tenancy coupled with equity and unjust enrichment dismissed.
17 Dec 2024

LOW WEE HENG MY US FOOD SDN BHD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-255-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-255-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

No valid written renewal notice was proven; Defendant held over after the tenancy expired and failed to raise a bona fide triable issue on renewal. Damages (double rent and restoration/utility costs) were sufficiently evidenced by affidavits, invoices and correspondence and quantifiable less the retained deposit. Although the sale during the tenancy prima facie breached clause 4.18, that breach was not pleaded as a set-off and did not prevent summary judgment on the Plaintiff's claim; the Defendant's counterclaim on breach of option to purchase may proceed to trial limited to potential nomina…
5 Nov 2024

CHUA KIEW HUA 1. ) LOW CHIN CHOY 2. ) LOW AH PENG 3. ) LOW TI 4. ) LOW KONG BING 5. ) LOW KONG SENG 6. ) LOW KWONG THIN

Citation

BA-12ANCvC-15-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12ANCvC-15-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Summary judgment was appropriate because plaintiffs satisfied Order 14 prerequisites and defendant failed to raise a triable issue: the lease had expired, there was no renewal or consent, notice to vacate was issued and defendant held over; under section 28(4)(a) Civil Law Act 1956 landlord is entitled to double rent for holding over.