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

2021 MarsdenLR 1228

HIGH COURT MALAYA MUAR
NUR AMIRA JAINUDIN – Appellant
Versus
DIWI KENCHANA MOKHTAR & ANOR – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: JB-24NCVC-198-08/2020]



Petitioner Advocates:Suhaidi Zakaria,Mawar Nur Izatti Md Zamri ,Respondent Advocate: Syafiee Naim

Transfers of property titles obtained through illegal activities such as unlicensed money lending are invalid, emphasizing the doctrine of indefeasibility of title as conditioned by lawful acquisition.

Headnote:(A) National Land Code 1965 – Section 340 – Doctrine of Indefeasibility of Title – Transfer of property titles resulting from illegal money lending – Title confers indefeasibility unless tainted by fraud or illegality – The court found the transfers of the properties to be null and void due to their association with unlawful activities under Money Lenders Act 1951 – The registered owner could not confer ownership nor enforce rights from such illegal transactions. (Paras 50-54)

(B) Money Lenders Act 1951 – Sections 5 and 16 – Unlicensed money lending – Any contract for loans by unlicensed money lenders rendered invalid and unenforceable – The court recognized Jainudin's actions as unlawful, thus affecting the transferability and legitimacy of ownership claims. (Paras 41-43)

Facts of the case: The court addressed a dispute over property ownership involving previous and current owners, where the underlying transaction was tied to unlicensed money lending, leading to the cancellation of respective property titles. (Paras 3-9)

Findings of Court: A ruling was made that the properties in question could not have legal titles conferred due to their association with the unlicensed money lending activities of the previous owner. (Paras 46-49)

Issues: Whether the doctrine of indefeasibility of title applies; whether the transfers of title from Jainudin to Nor Amira were valid; and whether the relevant transaction may be enforced given the illegal nature of its conception. (Paras 86-92)

Ratio Decidendi: Title ownership must stem from lawful acts; thus, any title derived from illegal agreements is defective and unenforceable - the court emphasized the principle of ex dolo malo non oritur actio. (Paras 109-111)

Result: The Originating Summons was dismissed, with directions for the transfer of ownership to the rightful claimant while imposing obligations against illegal acts. (Paras 109-110)

JUDGMENT

Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud JC:

Introduction

[1] This is an application vide Originating Summons seeking for an Order for vacant possession by way of summary judgment pursuant O 89 r 7 Rules of 2012 and s 327 and 329 National Land Code 1965 and the following reliefs:

i. The Plaintiff as the registered owner of the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore as well as the buildings on the 2 properties with the addresses of No 14 and 14A, Jalan Penghulu Kassim, 86000 Kluang, in the State of Johore for the reason that the Plaintiff has the right to obtain vacant possession of the said properties and the Defendants were occupying the land without license or permission;

ii. The Defendants are to surrender vacant possession of the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore within seven (7) days from the date of the Court Order;

iii. An Order that the Defendants and/or their agents and/or the representatives are prohibited and/or estopped from staying and/or occupying the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore for all times;

iv. That the Private Caveat that was registered with the Presentation Number 40938/2019 that was entered by the 1st Defendant on 28 October 2019 on the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore are to be cancelled and/or removed and/or set aside;

v. That the Private Caveat that was registered with the Presentation Number 5683 / 2018 entered by the 2nd Defendant on 14 February 2018 on the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore are to be cancelled and/or removed and/or set aside;

vi. An Order that the Registrar of Land Titles of Johor Bahru and/or Land Administrator and/or any relevant authorities are to carry out all the necessary measures ir actions to enforce and/or give effect to this Order to cancel and/or remove and/or set aside the said Private Caveats;

vii. An Order that the 1st Defendant and/or the 2nd Defendant and/or their agents and/or their representatives are estopped from making the application to enter Caveat on the properties that are held under the Title No PN56574 Lot 11359 and the Title No PN56574 Lot 11360, both of Bandar Kluang Sub District, District of Kluang, State of Johore;

viii. The Plaintiff is granted the liberty to apply for any consequential Orders that are deemed necessary for the execution of the reliefs or order granted by the Court;

ix. The Defendants are to pay General Damages as a result of the Act(s) of Trespass and/or occupying the property without permission and/or consent of the Plaintiff as the registered owner;

x. The Defendants are to pay aggravated damages and exemplary damages as a result of the continuing trespass;

xi. An Order that the 1st Defendant and 2nd Defendant are to pay damages for the Caveat which was entered wrongfully;

xii. Defendants are to pay interests at the rate of 5% per annum on the damages calculated from the date of judgment until the full and final settlement;

xiii. Cost of this action is to be paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiff;

xiv. Other reliefs or orders that the Court deems fit and just.

[2] The Cause Papers are as follows:

i. Originating Summons (enclosure)

ii. Affidavit-in-support (enclosure)

iii. Affidavit-in-opposition (enclosure)

iv. Affidavit-in-reply (enclosure)

Background Facts

[3] The Plaintiff is the registered owner as well as the beneficial owner of the properties that are held under the Titles No PN56574


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