The Applicant lacked the requisite legal standing under the Land Acquisition Act to contest the compensation awarded due to being registered post-acquisition.

[1] In this reference to the High Court (Reference), the applicant (Applicant) has objected to the compensation amounting to RM2,084,705.00 (Compensation) awarded by the respondent (Respondent) for the acquisition of part of the land held under title PM 4629, PT 1864, Sungai Buloh Mukim, Petaling District (Scheduled Land).

[2] According to the Selangor State Gazette (Gazette), the Scheduled Land was to be acquired on 21 April 2016 (Acquisition Date). The Gazette stated that the registered proprietor of the Scheduled Land was Encik Ramlan bin Taibin (Encik Ramlan).

[3] Encik Ramlan sold the Scheduled Land to the Applicant and the Applicant was only registered as the owner of the Scheduled Land on 26 July 2016 (after the Acquisition Date).

[4] This Reference raises the following questions:

(1) whether the Applicant is a "person interested" in the Scheduled Land on the Acquisition Date so as to be entitled to file the Reference under s 37(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 ( LAA ). This is a novel question regarding the Applicant's locus standi to file the Reference under s 37(1) ;

(2) if the Applicant has no locus standi to file the Reference, whether the Land Reference Court is estopped from taking cognizance of the Applicant's lack of locus standi by the fact that:

(a) the Applicant attended the enquiry conducted by the Respondent under s 12(1) LAA to determine the amount of Compensation (Enquiry); and

(b) in "Form G" of the Second Schedule to the LAA (Form G), the Respondent awarded the Compensation to the Applicant.

I am not able to find any previous case which has discussed whether the equitable doctrine of estoppel can bar the application of LAA ; and

(3) if the Applicant has the locus standi to file the Reference, whether the Land Reference Court should increase the Compensation because:

(a) the LAA has not referred to any "comparable" as provided in para 1(1A) [Paragraph 1(1A)] of the First Schedule (1st Schedule) to the ; and

(b) the Respondent has not adequately considered "injurious affection" (as a result of the land acquisition) caused to the part of the Applicant's land which has not been acquired (Residual Land) under para 2(d) of the First Schedule [Paragraph 2(d)],

B. Is Applicant A "Person Interested" In Compensation On Acquisition Date?

[5] Sections 2 (1) (definition of "person interested'), 8(1), 12(1), 37(1) LAA and para 1(1) of the 1st Schedule [Paragraph 1(1)] provide as follows:

"Interpretation

2(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires:

"person interested" includes every person claiming an interest in compensation to be made on account of the acquisition of land under this Act, but does not include a tenant at will;

Declaration that land is required for a public purpose

8(1)When the State Authority decides that any of the lands referred to in s 7 are needed for any of the purposes referred to in s 3, a declaration in Form D shall be published in the Gazette.

Enquiry by the Land Administrator

12(1)On the date appointed under of subsection 10(1) the Land Administrator shall make full enquiry into the value of all scheduled lands and shall as soon as possible thereafter assess the amount of compensation which in his opinion is appropriate in each case, according to the consideration set out in the Fi