The court confirmed that parties are bound by contracts even if they do not understand the language of the document, absent claims of fraud or misrepresentation.

Introduction

[1] The Plaintiff sued the Defendant for breach of contract and for the tort of trespass and claimed for, inter alia, specific performance of a Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 29 December 2006 ("the SPA").

[2] The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant had entered into the SPA with him to sell a parcel of land under PT 93081873 (Lot 36) which was to be registered under CL 085330776 measuring an area of 4.363 hectares or 10.78 acres situated at Nangoh, in the District of Beluran, Sabah ("the Land").

[3] The Plaintiff further claimed that the Defendant had granted the Plaintiff a Power of Attorney over the Land dated 29 December 2006 ("the PA").

[4] The Defendant has filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff, inter alia, for a declaration that he was the registered owner of the Land and that the SPA and the PA are null and void and have no legal effect.

[5] In the alternative, the Defendant claimed that if there was any dealing and/ or document executed between him and the Plaintiff, it was only to grant the Plaintiff a sub-lease of 10 years over the Land from the year 2006 to 2016. The Defendant further claimed that the sub-lease had expired in 2016 when he re-entered the Land and refused the Plaintiff access to the Land.

The Agreed Issues To Be Tried

[6] The parties have filed a Statement of Agreed Issues to be Tried (Encl 88) listing out the following issues for the Court's determination:

(i) What was the parties' intention when entering into the SPA and the PA;

(ii) Whether the Defendant had sold the Land to the Plaintiff;

(iii) Whether the SPA and the PA are valid and enforceable between the parties; and

(iv) Whether the Defendant's Counterclaim is statute barred.

The Plaintiff's Evidence

[7] Apart from the Plaintiff himself (PW3), the other 2 witnesses who testified for the Plaintiff were PW1 and PW2.

[8] PW1 who is a Court Clerk with the Sessions Court in Sandakan was subpoenaed by the Plaintiff to give evidence on the PA. PW1 testified that she recognised the signature of the person who had attested the PA to be one Mr George Bungow, who was once a Commissioner for Oaths with the Sandakan Court and who had passed away in the year 2012. PW1 further added that she had known the deceased since the year 2003 until he passed away.

[9] PW2 gave evidence that he had signed on the SPA as a witness to the signatures of the Plaintiff and the Defendant. He was a Ketua Kampung at the material time. Apart from the SPA, PW2 had also signed on a Payment Voucher dated 7 April 2008 which recorded the balance amount payable to the Defendant to be RM29,340.00. PW2 said that the Defendant's signature appeared on the said document above the "Received Payment" line.

[10] The Plaintiff, PW3 testified that he had known the Defendant since the year 2000 and that in 2006, the Defendant had asked him whether he was interested in purchasing the Land at the price of RM6,000.00 per acre. According to PW3, the Defendant told him that the land title to the Land had yet to be issued but that it had already been allotted the land title number CL 085330776.

[11] PW3 said that they had agreed to the sale of the Land at the price of RM6,000.00 per acre but that the Defendant had requested for the sum RM3,000.00 per acre to be stated on the SPA instead. The total purchase price was therefore RM64,680.00 that is, RM6,000.00 x 10.78 acres.

[12] It was PW3's ev