Back
2024 MarsdenLR 2257
MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA TEMERLOH
ROSLAN MAT NOR, J
TAN TIAN MENG LWN. – Appellant
Versus
PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH BENTONG – Respondent
[Rujukan Tanah No: CB-15-6-02/2023]
The determination of compensation for land acquisition must consider market value, severance, and injurious affection, requiring substantiation for claims.
Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act 1960 - Compensation determination - The court examined the compensation awarded for land acquisition for the East Coast Rail Link project, affirming the market value and severance claims. The court upheld the land administrator's award of RM670,488.00 as just and reasonable. (Paras 1, 19, 20)
(B) Market Value - The determination of market value must consider recent sales and comparable properties, as per the First Schedule of the Act. The court emphasized that the market value rule should not be construed strictly. (Paras 7, 8, 9)
(C) Injurious Affection - The court acknowledged the impact of the land acquisition on the remaining land, ruling that claims for injurious affection must be substantiated with evidence. (Paras 20, 24)
(D) Severance - The court confirmed that severance claims are valid when land is divided, and the compensation awarded for severance was upheld as reasonable. (Paras 26, 28)
Facts of the case:
The case involved the acquisition of agricultural land for the East Coast Rail Link project, with compensation awarded for market value, severance, and injurious affection. (Paras 1, 2)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the compensation awarded was justified based on market comparisons and the effects of severance and injurious affection. (Paras 19, 20)
Issues: The main issues included the adequacy of compensation for market value, severance, and the impact of injurious affection on the remaining land. (Paras 4, 20)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the market value determination must consider recent comparable sales and that severance and injurious affection claims require substantiation. (Paras 19, 20)
Result: The court upheld the compensation awarded by the land administrator.
Pendahuluan
[1] Ini adalah rujukan tanah yang berkaitan dengan pengambilan tanah untuk Projek Laluan Rel Pantai Timur (East Coast Rel Link - ECRL) bagi Daerah Bentong, Negeri Pahang (Fasa 1 Jajaran Utama). Ia melibatkan lot nombor PT 26167, No Hakmilik GM 4141, Mukim Bentong, Daerah Bentong, Negeri Pahang. Luas lot ini ialah 1.106 hektar. Jumlah yang diambil adalah sebanyak 0.3242 hektar. Ia adalah tanah pertanian dan syarat nyata dalam hakmilik tersebut adalah hendaklah digunakan untuk tanaman getah sahaja.
[2] Pentadbir Tanah telah mengadakan inkuiri pengambilan tanah ini dan telah memutuskan pampasan yang diberikan adalah berkaitan tanah ialah RM389,040.00, kos pecah pisah (severance) adalah RM187,632.00 dan kos kesan mudarat (injurious affection) adalah RM93,816.00. Jumlah keseluruhan pampasan yang diberikan kepada Pemohon adalah RM670,488.00. Selain daripada itu Pentadbir Tanah juga telah mengawardkan kos bicara sebanyak RM400.00.
[3] Penelitian kepada nota prosiding di hadapan Pentadbir Tanah adalah didapati bahawa nilai hartanah yang diambil kira dalam menentukan jumlah yang sewajarnya adalah pada kadar RM1,200,000.00 sehektar.
Bantahan Pemohon
[4] Dalam hujahan yang dikemukakan oleh pihak Pemohon adalah dinyatakan bahawa perbandingan nilai yang diberikan oleh Pentadbir Tanah adalah tidak wajar. Ini adalah disebabkan Pemohon menggunakan lima perbandingan sebaliknya Pentadbir Tanah telah menggunakan lapan perbandingan. Perbandingan tersebut adalah tidak wajar dipertimbangkan oleh Pentadbir Tanah. Oleh itu lot perbandingan yang sepatutnya yang diambil kira adalah lima lot iaitu Lot 8410, Lot 8442, Lot 15712, Lot 9052 dan Lot 8422.
[5] Dalam erti kata lain Pentadbir Tanah dikatakan gagal untuk menggunakan garis panduan yang diberikan di bawah Perenggan 1(1)(a) Jadual Pertama Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960. Sebaliknya Responden berhujah bahawa perbandingan yang dibuat oleh Pentadbir Tanah adalah teratur berdasarkan kepada perbandingan yang wajar dibuat.
Analisa
[6] Penelitian kepada Borang N yang dikemukakan kepada Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Bentong oleh Pemohon dan Borang O yang dikemukakan oleh Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Bentong kepada Mahkamah ini menunjukkan bahawa bantahan dikemukakan terhadap amaun pampasan berkaitan dengan nilai pasaran sebenar bagi tanah tersebut, pampasan yang setimpal untuk pecah pisah dan kegagalan Pentadbir Tanah memberikan pampasan yang setimpal terhadap kesan mudarat.
Harga Pasaran
[7] Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960 telah memperihalkan tatacara penilaian harga pasaran seperti yang dinyatakan di bawah Jadual Pertama Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960 seperti berikut:
FIRST SCHEDULE
Principles Relating To The Determination Of Compensation
1. Market value
(1) For the purposes of this Act the term "market value" where applied to any scheduled land shall mean the market value of such land-
(a) at the date of publication in the Gazette of the notification under s 4, provided that such notification shall within twelve months from the date thereof be followed by a declaration under s 8 in respect of all or some part of the land in the locality specified; or
(b) in other cases, at the date of the publication in the Gazette of the declaration made under s 8.
(1A) In assessing the market value of any scheduled land, the valuer may use any suitable method of valuation to arrive at the market value provided that regard may be had to the prices paid for the recent sales of lands with similar characteristics as the scheduled land which are situated within the vicinity of the scheduled land and with particular consideration being given to the last transaction on the scheduled land within two years from the date with reference to which the scheduled land is to be assessed under subparagraph (1).
(1B) Where only a part of the land is to be acquired, the market value of the scheduled land shall be determined by reference to the whole land as shown in the document of title of the scheduled land and after having regard to th
