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

2015 MarsdenLR 79

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
MKC CORPORATE & BUSINESS ADVISORY – Appellant
Versus
CUBIC ELECTRONICS SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent


Table of Content
1. dispute revolves around a tenancy agreement and subsequent alleged breaches. (Para 1 , 4)
2. court found breach of delivery of vacant possession essential under tenancy. (Para 23 , 24)
3. invalidity of subsequent agreements determined based on breach. (Para 30 , 31)
4. conspiracy established through deceitful agreements made by defendants. (Para 33 , 34)
Hadhariah Syed Ismail J:

Introduction

[1] The dispute between the plaintiff and the defendants arises from a Tenancy Agreement dated 12 August 2009 entered into between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant. The agreement is for three years expiring on 11 August 2012. Under the agreement, the 1st defendant let out its property measuring 1,234,197 sq ft to the plaintiff at a monthly rental of RM250,000.00. It is the term of the agreement that the plaintiff is entitled to sub-let the property to a third party and collect the rental proceeds. The existence of the agreement were made known by the 1st and 2nd defendant to the 3rd and 4th defendant. The 2nd defendant is the director in the 1st defendants company. It was alleged that the plaintiff had failed to pay the rental and refused to take vacant possession. By its solici

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