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

1960 MarsdenLR 162

HIGH COURT (KUALA LUMPUR)

AMBROSE, J


RE CHUA GEOK HWA
versus
.

ORIGINATING SUMMONS NO. 145 OF 1959

Decided On : 04-20-60

Advocates:
For the applicant - Tan Boon Teik (Director of Legal Aid); Director of Legal Aid For the respondent - CFJ Ess; M/s. RCH Lim & Co.

JUDGMENT

Ambrose J:

This is an application for an order of certiorari to remove into the High Court and quash a judgment of the Civil District Court and for an order of prohibition prohibiting the plaintiff and the bailiff from executing the judgment.

The judgment is in these terms:

It is ordered and adjudged that the plaintiff is entitled to recover against the defendant possession of all that the portion of the land at Kampong Eunos, Singapore, being part of Lots 137-38 to 137-80 of Mukim XXIII upon which the defendant has wrongfully and without the plaintiff's consent or authority erected a plank and zinc roof building which is numbered 38.

It is further ordered that the defendant do remove the said building from the abovementioned portion of the said land and do give the plaintiff vacant possession of the said portion of the said land on or before 30 September 1959.

The second order, which is for the removal of a building from the land, is a mandatory injunction, an action for which is excluded from the jurisdiction of the District Court by s. 67(g) of the Courts Ordinance. In making the order the District Court clearly exceeded its jurisdiction.

In my opinion, the District Court also exceeded its jurisdiction in making the first order for possession of the land. There is a building on the land, the value of which, it is not disputed, exceeds $1,000. It is impossible to make an order for possession relating to the land on which the building stands without affecting the possession and ownership of the building. If the first order is allowed to remain, the defendant would be excluded not only from the land but also from the building. Having regard to the value of the building, I think the value of the subject matter of the action exceeds $1,000 and, therefore, the District Court had no jurisdiction to make the first order.

For the above reasons, I order that the judgment of the District Court be removed into this Court and quashed an that the plaintiff and the bailiff of the District Court be prohibited from executing the judgment.

Order accordingly.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top