HIGH COURT MALAYA IPOH
LOH KAM HON – Appellant
Versus
KETUA PENGARAH KASTAM DIRAJA MALAYSIA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim of unlawful seizure of vehicle. (Para 1) |
| 2. issues surrounding ownership and lawful seizure criteria. (Para 2 , 8) |
| 3. analysis on reasonable cause for seizure under s 114. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 11) |
| 4. legal obligations under s 128 regarding seized property. (Para 9) |
[1] The subject matter of this suit is a vehicle model BMW 735 IL (Auto) bearing vehicle registration number AGW 288 ('the said vehicle'). The plaintiff had purchased the said vehicle on 28 September 2009 from one Yanty bt Mohamed Taib through a car dealer in Kuala Lumpur. The vehicle was however seized by the defendant pursuant to a notice of seizure dated 13 October 2009. The plaintiff has now filed this action and seeks a declaration that the said notice was unlawful, null and void and unsupported by the law. He further claims that the detention and seizure of his vehicle was unlawful, null and void and seeks the return of his vehicle as well as compensation for unlawful seizure.
[2] Arising from the events that transpired leading to the seizure of the vehicle, the broad issues that arise for consideration of the court can be summarised as follows:
(a) whether the detention and seiz
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.