A Sale & Purchase Agreement lacking genuine consideration is void and cannot enforce rights or remedies.

[1] The subject matter of this suit is a one unit of double storey terrace house known as Lot A1172, Taman Indah Jaya held under Sandakan Town Lease No: 077573516 (the said property). The parties are all related to each other. In the original action, the plaintiff and the defendant are sister and brother respectively, whilst in the counterclaim the brother is the plaintiff and the sister is the 1st defendant who is married to the 2nd defendant. The 3rd defendant in the counterclaim did not participate in the trial but had assured the court that it would abide by any decision of the court (see its letter dated 18 July 2016). For convenient, I shall refer to the plaintiff in the original action as Saikee, the defendant as Leicester and the 2nd defendant in the counterclaim as Venugopal.

[2] The plaintiff in the original action claims against the defendant as follows:

a) a declaration that the defendant and his family members and/or present occupiers of the property held under Town Lease No: 077573516 are unlawfully occupying the said property;

b) an Order that the defendant and his family members and all other occupiers surrender vacant possession of the property held under Town Lease No: 077573516 to the plaintiff forthwith;

c) the aggregate rental of RM19,500.00 from April 2012 to June 2015 inclusive at RM500.00 per month;

d) mesne profits at the rate of RM1,000.00 per month from July 2015 until vacant possession of the property held under Town Lease No: 077573516 is returned to the plaintiff;

e) statutory interest on the amount of RM19,500.00 at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of judgment till date of realisation;

f) costs on a full indemnity basis as against the defendant;

g) such other orders or relief as this Honourable court deems fit.

[3] The plaintiff in the counterclaim claims for the following:

a) a declaration that the said Sale and Purchase Agreement dated 10 July 2006 and executed by the 1st and the 2nd defendants as purchasers and the plaintiff as Vendor is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;

b) a declaration that the Novation Agreement Cum Assignment dated 26 July 2006 and executed by the 1st and 2nd defendant as Assignees And the plaintiff as the Assignor is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;

c) a declaration that the transfer of the said property in favour of the 1st and 2nd defendants under Memo No: MC1204070043 dated 4 April 2012 is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever;

d) a declaration that the transfer of the 1/2 share of the 2nd defendant to the plaintiff in the Original Action under Memo No: MC1204070044 dated 4 April 2012 is null and void and of no legal effect whatsoever and/or in any event academic;

e) an order that the plaintiff in the Original Action or the 1st defendant in the Counterclaim do surrender the title Town Lease No: 077573516 to the said property (the said title) to the defendant in the Original Action or the plaintiff in the Counterclaim within 7 days of Order;

f) an order that the 3rd defendant in the Counterclaim do rectify or amend the said title Town Lease No: 077573516 by deleting or cancelling the relevant memorial numbers of MC 1204070043 dated 4 April 2012 and MC No: 1204070044 dated 4 April 2102 endorsed on the said title Town Lease No: 077573516;

g) a declaration that the defendant in the Original Action or the plaintiff in the Counterclaim was and still is at all material the registered owner of the said property;

h) a declaration that the defendant in the Original Action or the plaintiff in the Counterclaim is at all material time and still is in lawful occupation or possession of the said property;

i) damages to be assessed against the plaintiff in the Original Action and the 2nd defendant in the Counterclaim jointly and/or severally;

j) statutory interest on the damages assessed at the rate of 5% per a