JAMES FOONG J The plaintiff in this case is applying to set aside two caveats lodged against a piece of property held under HS(M) 4839 for Lot 11337 Mukim of Empang, Daerah Ulu Langat, Selangor (hereinafter referred to as the said land). The first caveat is a registrars caveat placed on the said land at the request of the first defendants on the ground that the registered owner of the said land (the registered owner) is an adjudicated bankrupt. The second caveat placed by the second defendant is a private caveat based on the reason that the registered owner has entered into a sale and purchace agreement with the second defendant for the sale of the said land to the second defendant.

The plaintiff, on the other hand, is a successful bidder in a public auction conducted by the land administrator pursuant to foreclosure proceedings instituted by the chargee of the said land -- Standard Chartered Bank Malaysia Bhd (the bank). The plaintiff had paid a sum equivalent to 10% of the purchase price on 22 September 1994 to the land administrator with the balance of 90% to be paid within three months from that date. In order to finance this purchase, the plaintiff was able to secure a loan from a financial institution, but this loan cannot be disbursed unless the said land can be transferred and registered in the name of the plaintiff and thereafter charged to the financial institution. This obviously cannot be achieved in view of the presence of the two caveats on the said land. Henceforth, the plaintiff applied to remove them.

The first defendants raised token objection but are more interested in any balance money remaining over after payment to the bank for their necessary action. The Official Assignee (the first defendants) informed this court that since the registered owner was declared a bankrupt he has not made any attempts to communicate with the Official Assignees office despite the fact that it is mandatory to do so.

The second defendant, however, has filed an affidavit objecting to this plaintiffs application. He explained that he is a beneficial owner of the said property under a written sale and purchase agreement he entered into with the registered owner on 22 August 1984, and under the terms of this agreement he is allowed to pay the balance of the purchase price by instalment which was duly performed with him paying directly to the bank for and on behalf of the registered owner. According to him, this instalment payment was stopped when the registered owner was adjudicated a bankrupt. He has written to the Official Assignee but received no reply, and at the present moment he is awaiting further developments. He contended that being a beneficial owner he has a caveatable interest over the said land and, based on the fact that he has made significant payments towards the purchase price, his claim does raise serious questions to be tried and on the balance of convenience his private caveat ought to remain.

One other interesting contention of the second defendant, is the allegation of the plaintiff having no locus standi in this application since he cannot be considered as an aggrieved party for reason that the plaintiff himself has also not paid the full balance of the purchase price to the land administrator within the time stipulated in the terms and conditions of the public auction.

The plaintiff, however, argued that he has obtained an extension of time to pay the balance of the purchase price from the land administrator. To this, he annexed to his affidavit in reply, a letter dated 14 December 1994 addressed to him by the land administrator, Ulu Langat District (the authority who conduct the sale by public auction), granting him an extension of three months to pay the balance of the purchase price.

The plaintiff then proceeded to highlight to this court that up to the date of the hearing of this application, the second defendant has not filed any application to the honourable court to