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

2021 MarsdenLR 661

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
TIU CHEE TUAN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
PENTADBIR TANAH DAN DAERAH KUALA SELANGOR & ORS – Respondent
[Originating Summons No: BA-24NCVC-570-04-2021]



Petitioner Advocates:Nurul Aqilla Salleh ,Respondent Advocate: Pannirselvam Mannar

Encroached land reverts to State Authority under National Land Code, and plaintiffs demonstrate serious triable issues regarding their rights to occupy despite eviction notices.

Headnote:(A) National Land Code – Sections 46, 49, and 382A – Encroachment by river – The court finds serious triable issues regarding the reversion of land affected by the encroachment of the river to the State Authority and the plaintiffs' rights to occupy land adjacent to the river. (Paras 38-40)

(B) Summary Striking Out – The court dismissed the 5th Defendant's application as the plaintiff's action is not obviously unsustainable, upholding that relevant triable issues exist concerning prior permissions granted for occupation and the state of land due to erosion. (Paras 54-55)

Facts of the case: The plaintiffs have occupied the disputed land since before the 2005 sale of the title by the previous registered proprietors, Federal Oil Mills Bhd to Plusbury Development Sdn Bhd, and allege rights to continue occupying the land despite the 5th Defendant's eviction attempts under claims of it being encroached land. (Paras 4-28)

Findings of Court: The court determines that multiple serious triable issues exist related to land encroachment and the permission obtained by the plaintiffs to occupy the land in question, leading to the dismissal of the 5th Defendant's application for summary striking out. (Paras 53-55)

Issues: Key concerns included the legal ownership of occupied land following encroachment, the validity of eviction notices, and any permissions or rights conferred by previous proprietors. (Paras 30-52)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the plaintiffs' claims could not be dismissed summarily as they present legitimate and substantial claims reliant on triable issues, recognizing the importance of a trial for resolving complex factual situations. (Paras 54-56)

Result: The application for summary striking out was dismissed, and costs were awarded to the plaintiffs.

JUDGMENT

Tee Geok Hock JC:

Introduction

[1] The natural phenomena of soil erosion, advance of sea water and encroachment by sea or river can at times have a legal impact upon the registered proprietors of lands along sea shores or adjacent to rivers. Registered proprietors of lands along sea shores or adjacent to rivers may probably find it more prudent to construct protective barriers to stop the advance of sea or the encroachment by river onto their said lands rather than facing the risks of reversion of the encroachment area to the State Authority.

[2] As exemplified by the facts and circumstances of this case and issues in dispute between the parties herein, a registered proprietor of an alienated land adjacent to a river may have to face the risks of reversion of the alienated land or part thereof to the State authority by the operation of law and occurrence of natural phenomena and/or the related court proceedings arising from or in connection with issues pertaining to the encroachment by river.

[3] Enclosure 9 is the 5th Defendant's application under O 18 r 19(1)(b), (c) and/or (e ) of the Rules of 2012 to summarily strike out the Plaintiff's Originating Summons herein. On 1st September 2021 this court dismissed the 5th Defendant's application in Enclosure 9 on the ground that there are triable issues including (a) whether the lands occupied by the Plaintiffs or part thereof has formed part of a river or has been encroached by a river;

(b) whether the river or part thereof encroached by the river became State land automatically by operation of law; (c) whether under the law the land which forms part of a river or which has been encroached by a river can be alienated by the Land Administrator to a private person or company or can continue to be owned by a private legal entity; (d) whether the river land, river encroachment and lands adjoining the river including the lands occupied by the Plaintiffs should be re-surveyed in order to identify and ascertain the boundary of the river and the river encroachment as recommended or suggested by the office of Menteri Besar Selangor; (e) whether the Plaintiffs have acquired any rights under the laws or equity to occupy the subject-lands; (f) whether the Plaintiffs in the circumstances of the present case have any rights under the laws or equity against the 5th Defendant and/or the 6th Defendant. It has been held by this court that the present case is not a clear and obvious case for summarily striking out the Plaintiff's Originating Summons without a trial and that the Plaintiff's Originating Summons is not obviously unsustainable. Dissatisfied with the said decision, the 5th Defendant has appealed to the court of Appeal.

Background Facts

[4] As there are multiple parties in the present case with a rather lengthy history and background it is more appropriate to set out the brief background factual averments and affidavit evidence relating to the subject lands and the river in chronological sequence.

[5] Sungai Selangor, the river from which the State of Selangor derives her name, has been in existence since time immemorial.

[6] Along part of the river bank of Sungai Selangor at the location known as Bagan Sungai Yu is a fishing village with many houses and shops. This fishing village is located at the river bank of Sungai Selangor very near the river mouth where Sungai Selangor meets the Straits of Malacca.

[7] Among the residents of the Bagan Sungai Yu village are the Plaintiffs who, according to the Plaintiffs' averments in affidavit, are fishermen and traders of seafoods and fishery products who have been occupying and settling at the river bank and adjacent lands since many years ago [paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff's Affidavit-inSupport, Enclosure 2].

[8] Federal Oil Mills Bhd was the previous registered proprietor of several hundred acres of estate land including the land parcel of area 47,931.4 square metres (approximate 12 acres) along the river Sungai Selangor at Bagan Sungai Yu locati


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