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

2021 MarsdenLR 656

HIGH COURT MALAYA MUAR
SIA HER YAM REALTY SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
STRATA CENTURY SDN BHD – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: JB-22NCVC-30-06/2019]



Petitioner Advocates:M Nagarajah,Michael Anthony ,Respondent Advocate: Norizawati Md Noor

Contractual obligations for construction must be fulfilled as per agreements, regardless of local authority approvals for alternative systems.

Headnote:(A) Specific Relief Act 1950 – Section 18; Civil Law Act 1956 – Section 11 – Plaintiff seeks specific performance of obligations under SPA and Letter of Undertaking regarding sewerage construction – 1st Defendant's failure to comply with construction requirements and claims of time-barred objections – Court held that obligations must be fulfilled as per binding agreements and existing approved sewerage plans. (Paras 174, 175)

(B) Contract Law – Privity of contract and beneficiary rights – The court ruled that the Plaintiff, despite not being a direct party to the SPA, has enforceable rights based on terms agreed by the Defendants. (Paras 58-107)

Facts of the case: Plaintiff is a property development company alleging breach of contract against the 1st Defendant, a property developer, for failure to construct agreed sewerage pipings as per the SPA and Letter of Undertaking. (Paras 1-6)

Findings of Court: The 1st Defendant is ordered to comply with the construction obligations and to compensate Plaintiff under Section 18 of the Specific Relief Act 1950. (Paras 174-175)

Issues: The court addressed whether the Plaintiff can enforce obligations under the SPA despite being a non-party and if the claim is time-barred. (Paras 58-112)

Ratio Decidendi: The obligation under the SPA remains active despite the local authority approving septic tanks; the court emphasized the need to adhere to contractual obligations and town planning regulations. (Paras 173-175)

Result: The claims were allowed in favor of the Plaintiff.

Judgement Key Points

Certainly! Please provide the legal document content or specify the key points you'd like me to analyze, and I will assist you accordingly.


JUDGMENT

Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud JC:

Introduction

[1] This is a Writ of Summons filed on 7 June 2019 seeking for the following reliefs:

(a) that the 1st Defendant be ordered to specifically perform cl 18(a) of the SPA and / or the Letter of Undertaking, to wit, to undertake construction of sewerage pipings serving the development of the Plaintiff's Lands so that it shall be of sufficient depth and gradient approved by the relevant authority for purposes to serve the Plaintiff's Lands and / or the Plaintiff's development;

(b) that the 1st Defendant be ordered to compensate the Plaintiff in addition to or in substitution of specific performance of cl 18(a) of the SPA and / or the Letter of Undertaking in accordance with s 18 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 ;

(c) pre-judgment interest on the sum awarded as compensation in prayer (b) pursuant to s 11 of the Civil Law Act 1956 from the date of the Writ of Summons until the date of judgment at an interest rate of 5% per annum;

(d) post-judgment interest on the sum awarded as compensation in prayer (b) pursuant to O 42 r 12 of the Rules of 2012 from the date of judgment till full and final realisation thereof at an interest rate of 5% per annum;

(e) costs; and

(f) such further order or other relief as this Honourable Court deems fit and just.

[2] The Cause Papers are as follows:

i. Writ of Summons

ii. Statement of Claim

iii. Memorandum of Appearance

iv. Statement of Defence

v. Amended Statement of Claim

vi. Reply to the Statement of Defence

vii. Bundle of Pleadings

viii. Synopsis of the Plaintiff's case

ix. Triable Issues

x. List of Witnesses

xi. Agreed Facts

[3] The Plaintiff called 2 witnesses to the stand while the 1st Defendant called 2 witnesses to the stand while the 2nd Defendant did not call any witness to the stand.

Background Facts

[4] The Plaintiff is a company incorporated in Malaysia under the Companies Act 2016 with its registered address at Suite 8-01, Wisma Sia Her Yam, Jalan Ros, 85000 Segamat, Johor Darul Takzim. The Plaintiff is in the business of property development.

[5] The 1st Defendant is a company incorporated in Malaysia under the Companies Act 2016 with its registered address at No 29 (1st Floor), Jalan Utama 2/4, Taman Utama, 85000 Segamat, Johor. The 1st Defendant is in the business of property development.

[6] The 2nd Defendant is a company incorporated in Malaysia under the Companies Act 2016 with its registered address at No 2, Ground Floor, Jalan PS 3, Plaza Semabok, Melaka. The 2nd Defendant is in the business of property holding, is a company owned by the Plaintiff's Managing Director Dato Sia's brother.

[7] In the past, the land that is now owned by the 1st Defendant belonged to a company which was jointly owned by 5 brothers, among them the Managing Directors of the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant. After some restructuring, the subject land came to be owned by the 2nd Defendant while the Plaintiff owned the adjacent property.

[8] The 2nd Defendant used to own all the twenty-six (26) pieces of commercial lots under the title deeds, particulars of which are HS(D) 47936 to HS(D) 47961 for PTD 21022 to PTD 21047, being the re-alienated lots of the original master title held under EMR 1673, Lot 1929, all in Sub-District of Sungai Segamat, District of Segamat, Johor ("the Properties" or "the Development Land").

The Sale And Purchase Agreement

[9] On 11 June 2010, the 1st Defendant (as the Purchaser) and the 2nd Defendant (as the Vendor) entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement ("the SPA") concerning 26 lots of land in Segamat, Johor ("the Development Land") whereby the 1st Defendant agreed to purchase the Development Land from the 2nd Defendant.

[10] At the time the SPA was entered into, the Plaintiff had in hand a Sewerage Reticulation Layout Plan ("the Sewerage Plan") which was approved by the Sewerage Services Department of the Local Government and Housing Ministry on 3 August 2004.

[11] The terms of the SPA, inter alia, are as follows:

"10. Time wherever mentioned herei


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 Back to top