The plaintiffs failed to prove the existence of an oral contract due to insufficient evidence and the lack of privity since the defendant was not incorporated at the time of the agreement.

Headnote:(A) Evidence Act 1950 - Section 101 - Contract Law - Oral Agreements - Case revolves around an alleged oral agreement for a privatization project. Court found insufficient evidence to substantiate the claim of such an agreement, emphasizing the burden of proof lies with the plaintiffs. (Paras 45-66)

(B) Privity of Contract - The existence of a contract requires parties to be in agreement. Court found no privity as the defendant was not incorporated at the time of the alleged agreement. (Paras 49-50)

PENGURUSAN PROJEK DAYA SDN BHD & ANOR vs KONSORTIUM LAPANGAN TERJAYA BHD - 2011 MarsdenLR 4424