SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 MarsdenLR 50

HIGH COURT MALAYA GEORGETOWN
TECHWARE ENTERPRISE SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CHAN SAI KHUEN & ANOR – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:N Ahilan ,Respondent Advocate: A Suppiah,David Tan

Table of Content
1. developer failed to deliver (Para 1 , 2)
2. claim for liquidated damages (Para 3 , 4)
3. preliminary matters discussed (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. developer's liability for damages (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59)
5. appeal dismissed (Para 60)

JUDGMENT

(Appeal Against Summary Judgment)

Kenneth St James J:

Prelusion

[1] The Appellant-Defendant (D) was the developer of a housing development project known as "The Retreat" (Project). The Respondents-Plaintiffs (Ps) were the purchasers of a parcel of property in the Project.

[2] D and Ps entered into a prescribed Schedule H (Housing Development (Control And Licensing) Regulations 1989) sale and purchase agreement (SPA) to govern the purchase. D failed to deliver vacant possession (VP) of Ps' unit within the contracted period. This made D liable to pay Ps "liquidated damages" (LD), according to the relevant terms of the SPA.

[3] Ps filed this suit in the Sessions Court to claim the amount of LD they asserted they were entitled to. Ps applied to enter summary judgment against D (under O 14 of the Rules Of 2012). D resisted the entry of a summary judgment. The Sessions Court allowed Ps' application and ordered summ


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top