Negligence in property transactions requires due diligence by authorities in verifying authenticity of documents; failure leads to liability.

[1] The Plaintiffs are three individuals who had purchased a property namely GM No 4745, Lot Nos 3325 and 3326, Mukim Hulu Yam, Daerah Ulu Selangor, Negeri Selangor ("the property"). The First and the Second Defendant are the Land Administrator of the District of Hulu Selangor and the Director of Land and Mines for the State of Selangor who are empowered under s 12 of the National Land Code ("the Code") to exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred or imposed under the Code. The Third Defendant is an advocate and solicitor acting for the Plaintiffs while the Fourth Defendant is an advocate and solicitor acting for the vendor and the holder of a Power of Attorney (PA).

[2] The Plaintiffs are seeking for:-

(a) Special damages amounting to RM364, 191.05;

(b) General damages for loss of income and profit;

(c) Exemplary damages;

(d) Interest of 5% from 9 November 2013 until the date of full realisation and costs.

Facts

[3] On 9 February 2011 the Plaintiffs entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement ("the SPA") with one Chow Wei Sium ("donee") who signed the same for the bogus Low Poh Kim ("imposter") the purported registered proprietor of the said property. Apparently a PA was purportedly executed by Low Poh Kim ("the proprietor") to authorise the donee to act on his behalf.

[4] The SPA was drawn up by the Third Defendant (DW5) the advocate and solicitor engaged by the Plaintiffs to handle the transaction whilst the Fourth Defendant (DW4) was engaged by the imposter and the donee. The transaction went through and the property was duly registered under the Plaintiffs' names. Everything went well until the First Plaintiff (PW1) decided to let out the property and for that purpose he put up a signboard on the said property. Not long thereafter, he received a telephone call where the caller told him that the proprietor had never intended to let it out. After being alerted, PW1 went to DW5's office to find out what had happened and he was advised to lodge a police report ie exh D12 dated 22 June 2011.

[5] Subsequently the Plaintiffs received a letter dated 13 November 2011 from Messrs Iza Ng Yeoh & Kit informing them that the proprietor never intended to sell his property and had no knowledge of the sale that had taken place. The Plaintiffs were requested to return the property to the proprietor.

[6] The proprietor then commenced an action against six Defendants namely, the Director of Land and Mines for the State of Selangor, the donee, the three Plaintiffs and the Land Administrator of the District of Hulu Selangor vide Guaman Sivil No 22NCVC-826-06/2012 ("Suit 826") (reported as Low Poh Kim v. Pengarah Tanah dan Galian Negeri Selangor & Ors, [2015] 7 MLJ 287). The High Court allowed the proprietor's claim and ordered that the property be restored to him, the PA was declared void and the identity card ("IC") of the imposter was found to be fake. Both the First and the Sixth Defendants were also held liable for failing in their duties to safeguard the interest of the proprietor.

Plaintiff's Case

[7] The First Plaintiff (PW1) testified that sometime early January 2011 he was informed by one Davadas a broker that there was a property up for sale at a price of RM280,000.00. Having obtained the location of the property from Davadas, PW1 went to view the property with his family on the next day. And the following day together with