Back
FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
YEO PING TIENG & ORS – Appellant
Versus
ELITPROP SDN BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the appeal regarding land ownership. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. background facts regarding the transactions and agreements related to the land. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 14) |
| 3. high court findings on fraud and decisions regarding the validity of titles. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 26) |
| 4. court of appeal's decisions and errors in addressing fraud. (Para 25 , 27 , 30) |
| 5. key legal issues and conclusions reached by the federal court. (Para 29 , 32 , 44) |
| 6. court must accurately address fraud to ensure justice. (Para 31 , 56) |
| 7. fraud can negate indefeasibility of a registered title. (Para 34 , 36 , 37) |
[1] This is an appeal by the appellants from the judgment of the Court of Appeal that reversed the judgment of the High Court, in allowing the appellants claim that the registered title of the respondent as the proprietor of the land in question was defeasible on the ground of fraud. The appeal concerns a piece of land together with a 2½ storey bungalow to be erected thereon.
[2] The appellants are the plaintiffs in the High Court. The respondent is the 3rd defendant. The parties will be referred to according to the titles assigned to them in the High Court.
Background Facts
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
