Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA MUAR
LEMBAGA PERINDUSTRIAN KAYU MALAYSIA – Appellant
Versus
TISISIT CORPORATION (M) SDN BHD – Respondent
What is... the binding effect of the explicit terms of the tenancy agreement on extensions and possession? What is... the Court's interpretation approach to contract terms when considering 3-year tenancy vs. 6-year extension? What is... the plaintiff's right to recover possession and cut utilities after expiry, and the illegality of continuing occupancy?
Key Points: - The tenancy agreement's explicit terms bind the parties and govern extension rights; extension requires written application 3 months before expiry and mutual consent (!) (!) (!) . - The court applies standard contract interpretation principles, emphasizing words over negotiations and the background matrix of fact while respecting the document's natural meaning (!) (!) (!) . - The defendant occupied the premises post-expiry without proper extension and was ordered to vacate; utilities were cut by MTIB, with the court deeming continued occupancy as tenant at sufferance and recognizing the plaintiff's right to recover possession by court process (!) (!) (!) -
JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] This is a Writ of Summons by Lembaga Perindustrian Kayu Malaysia (the Malaysian Wood Industries Board) ("MTIB") against the Tsisit Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd ("Tsisit") seeking for the following reliefs:
i. The Defendant ("Tsisit") be order to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the property that is held under the Title PTD 4081 HS(D) 22974, Sri Menanti Sub District, District of Muar, State of Johore to the Plaintiff ("MTIB") within fourteen (14) days from the Order of the Court.
ii. If the Defendant ("Tsisit") failed to vacate and hand over vacant possession of the property that is held under the Title PTD 4081 HS(D) 22974, Sri Menanti Sub District, District of Muar, State of Johore to the Plaintiff ("MTIB") within fourteen (14) days from the Order of the Court, the Court's Bailiff is to enter the said premise and use force to take vacant possession of the said premise.
iii. Cost to be borne by the Defendant ("Tsisit").
iv. Other reliefs that the Court deems fit and just.
[2] The Defendant in their Statement of Defence made a counterclaim as follows:
a. A Declaration that the Notice of Termination and surrender of vacant posses
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
