SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 MarsdenLR 867

FEDERAL COURT KUALA LUMPUR
KRISHNADAS ACHUTAN NAIR & ORS – Appellant
Versus
MANIYAM SAMYKANO – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Gurbachan Singh ,Respondent Advocate: DP Vijandran

JUDGMENT

Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

[1] This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court at Ipoh, dismissing with costs the appellants' claim against the respondent for several declarations the cumulative effect of which would be to impugn the title of the respondent to the subject land. The facts of this case, made complex by the machinations of the first appellant, have been sufficiently analysed and admirably dealt with by the learned Judge who tried the action. And we must say at once that he has been extremely kind in his review of the first appellant's conduct. We entertain no difficulty in affirming his findings based on the veracity of the witnesses who testified before him and with his conclusion that the appellants ought to fail in the action.

[2] But for the learned Judge's observations upon s 340(4)(b) of the National Land Code, 1965 ('the Code') which, we must say in all fairness to him, did not affect his decision, written reasons are not called for in this case. However, his judgment has since been reported in [1993] 2 MLRH 600, [1993] 3 MLJ 465. And it has been referred to in at least one work upon the subject. See, Teo Keang Sood and Khaw Lake Tee, Land Law in Malays

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top