26 Aug 2025
GANAESH RAU A/L B.A.RAMARAU 1. ) BHASKAR A/L NADARAJAN 2. ) PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR
- Citation
- BA-22NCvC-487-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Court
- High Court
- Case number
- BA-22NCvC-487-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
The 1st SPA was unenforceable because at the time D1 had no proprietary title to transfer (only an offer/option), therefore nemo dat applied and the contract was void and unenforceable; fraud was not proven on the balance of probabilities; D2, being a stranger and constrained by state resettlement policy, cannot be ordered to sell; having received RM40,000 under a contract later held void, D1 must restitute the sum with interest under s.66 Contracts Act 1950.