Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
KARAK LAND SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CHIA SOO NEE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of claim regarding flooding and easement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 7) |
| 2. duty of care and misrepresentation not being pleaded. (Para 11 , 12 , 14 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. limitations of claims based on easement rights. (Para 24 , 37 , 40) |
| 4. final judgment favoring the appellant. (Para 46 , 47 , 48) |
Introduction
[1] The appellant/defendant lodged an appeal ("Appeal") against a judgment after full trial of the learned Sessions Court Judge ("SCJ") dated 27 July 2020. The SCJ had allowed the respondent's/plaintiffs claim. The respondent/plaintiff in turn filed an application vide enclosure 13 ("Striking Out Application") to strike out the Appeal.
[2] I allowed the Appeal and set aside the judgment of the SCJ. I also dismissed the Striking Out Application. These are the grounds of my decision. The parties will be referred to as they were in the Court below. Where the appellant was the defendant ("D") and the respondent was the plaintiff ("P").
Findings Of The Sessions Court
[3] The SCJ allowed P's claim and awarded P:
(a) RM60,000 per year for P's land to be used as a water easement from 1 January 2019 until he decides that his land is no longer required as easemen
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
