Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Transfer of property

Legal area

Court

17 Sept 2025

LOGAMMAH A/P RAMASAMY DARASAMY A/L RAJU

Citation

BA-24NCvC-382-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCvC-382-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

There are multiple substantial and material disputes of fact arising from the parties' own affidavits and documents (conflicting witness statements on whether the one-third share was conditional, whether parties are divorced, whether relinquishment occurred and existence of a will) that cannot be resolved on affidavit evidence; therefore originating summons is inappropriate and the matter must proceed to viva voce at a full trial; Enclosure 1 is dismissed with costs.
11 Sept 2024

MOHD MUSTAMAM BIN CHE YUSOF YACOB BIN AWANG

Citation

DA-22NCvC-36-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-22NCvC-36-06/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he made the alleged payments or that there was an agreement for the purchase of the property; consequently there was no proven unjust enrichment of the defendant. Although res judicata did not strictly bar the claim, the failure of proof was dispositive. The claim is dismissed with costs.
25 Jul 2024

CHOY KAM LEE beramal dibawah nama gaya K.L.CHOY & CO ENERGISER PROPERTIES SDN.BHD

Citation

AA-B52-7-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

AA-B52-7-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the Court found Defendant owed unpaid legal fees to Plaintiff; Plaintiff validly exercised a solicitor's lien under s124 Contracts Act 1950 and was entitled to set-off RM400,000 from the sale proceeds held, leaving a judgment sum of RM102,235.26 against Defendant; Defendant's counterclaim failed and was dismissed with costs.
7 Jun 2024

1. ) OSMAN BIN ISMAIL 2. ) SITI SALMIAH BINTI ISMAIL 3. ) UMMI KALSUM BINTI ISMAIL 4. ) KAMARIAH BINTI MAIDEEN SHEIK 5. ) ISMAIL BIN IDRIS 1. ) KAMARALZAMAN BIN IDRIS 2. ) NORMALA BINTI MOHD YATIM 3. ) Pentadbir Tanah Pejabat Tanah Negeri S

Citation

BA-22NCvC-580-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-580-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found the Plaintiffs proved that the 5th Plaintiff lacked capacity at the material times and that the 1st Defendant exercised undue influence and breached trust; res judicata did not apply because prior orders were procedural not merits judgments; oral testimony of treating doctors was admissible despite no formal expert reports; there was no credible evidence that RM55,000 was paid; accordingly the impugned transfer was tainted and the Plaintiffs were entitled to damages and costs as quantified by the Court.
11 Mar 2024

ONG TEONG KHOON ONG TIONG HWA

Citation

PA-22NCvC-43-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-43-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff was an undischarged bankrupt at the time he commenced the suit and had not obtained the prior sanction of the Director General of Insolvency as required by Insolvency Act 1967 s38(1)(a); therefore he lacked capacity to maintain the action and the suit was a nullity to be struck out in limine; the preliminary objection could be entertained despite absence of prior notice because it went to jurisdiction and there was no unfair surprise.
18 Dec 2023

1. ) SIAW YEN JAK 2. ) SIAW LEE YEN 1. ) YOONG WAI KWONG 2. ) ERLIANA BINTI ROSLAN 3. ) YOONG WAI SAM 4. ) YOONG WAI KEN

Citation

NA-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-12B-5-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Under s38(3) Electricity Supply Act 1990 and binding authority, liability for loss due to meter tampering is imposed on the registered consumer/account holder at the time the offence is discovered; Premier Harvest was the registered consumer at the relevant time and failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the registered owners (third parties) or occupiers were responsible, therefore the appeals are dismissed and the decisions of the Sessions Court are affirmed.
6 Nov 2023

1. ) FATIMAH GNANAM A/P SAVERIMUTHU 2. ) FATIMAH GNANAM A/P SAVERIMUTHU (wakil litigasi MARGARET A/P SAVERIMUTHU, pesakit) 1. ) KOLANDAI MARY A/P SAVARIMUTHU 2. ) CLEMENT A/L SEVAKUMAR 3. ) AMUTHA SUPPAYAH (disaman selaku peguamcara yang be

Citation

PA-22NCvC-3-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-3-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiffs failed to prove misrepresentation, fraud, collusion or conspiracy by the Defendants; contemporaneous documents and credible evidence showed the transfers were gifts and P1 understood and signed Form 14A; 3rd Defendant acted as solicitor for D1 in accordance with professional standards and did not conspire or breach duty; claim dismissed and costs awarded.
18 Apr 2022

TEH PENG HEONG 1. ) FAN SOW YOONG 2. ) FAN CHEE KEONG

Citation

WA-24NCvC-1477-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-24NCvC-1477-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found there was clear beneficiary consent and an earlier High Court order (2.11.2021) vesting the property in the applicant as administrator; consequently paragraph (a) seeking direct vesting was redundant and dismissed, but paragraphs (b) and (c) were granted: respondents as joint administrators must execute the memorandum of transfer and related documents and deliver relevant records within 14 days, and if they fail the Deputy/Assistant Registrar of the High Court Kuala Lumpur is authorized to sign the documents to effect the transfer; no order as to costs.
2 Mar 2022

DHAMODARAN A/L MUNUSAMY 1. ) KAVARIAMAL A/P MUNUSAMY 2. ) TAMBYRASAH A/L VYTHILINGAM

Citation

AA-22NCvC-105-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-22NCvC-105-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court exercised its discretion under Order 34 rule 2(4) ROC to set aside the default judgment because the defendants had engaged solicitors, provided documents and fees, and the non-compliance with pre-trial directions resulted from their solicitors' failings rather than any deliberate default by the defendants; relief was granted on terms requiring compliance within one month and payment of costs to the plaintiff.
1 Sept 2021

LINAWATY BINTI ASSIM (NO K/P : 630218-12-5782) SAIDATUL HANUM BINTI SAZALI (NO. K/P : 850818-06-5654)

Citation

WA-12BCY-1-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12BCY-1-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: the defendant's social‑media publications were defamatory (they referred to the plaintiff and were published to third parties), the defendant failed to establish justification or fair comment because publications were made with malice and selective editing/misrepresentation, the defendant did not acquire ownership of the consigned bag and deposit was non‑refundable under the seller's terms; plaintiff proved reputational damage and the appeal was dismissed.