Ramly Ali JC:

These are 26 appeals filed by the same appellant/defendant against 26 decisions of the learned magistrate Temerloh made on 29 January 2000 in favour of 26 different respondents/plaintiffs which arose from 26 separate civil suits. The appellant/defendant had filed 26 Appeal Notices on 10 February 2000 and later followed by 26 Memorandum of Appeal in respect of each decision.

Factual Background

All the respondents/plaintiffs were house buyers for low-cost houses built by the appellant/defendant at Taman Seraya, Triang, Pahang Darul Makmur. For that purpose, all the respondents/plaintiffs had entered into their respective agreements with the appellant/defendant. Out of the 26 respondents/plaintiffs, 13 of them were buyers for single-storey low-cost houses while the other 13, were buyers for double-storey low-cost houses. All the respondents/plaintiffs filed their claims separately against the appellant/defendant in the Magistrate Court Temerloh, claiming for compensation on the ground that their houses were not built in accordance with the specifications provided in the approved plans, which were part of the agreements. They claimed that the appellant/defendant had breached the agreements between them.

For the single-storey houses, the approved plan provides for the followings:

(a) the height of the house shall be 10 ft. from floor to ceiling;

(b) asbestos ceiling - to be installed;

(c) water PCC Vent - 2 layers;

(d) Roof rafters shall be from hardwood - size 2"x4";

(e) "hardcore" flooring;

(f) septic tank wall - 9 inches thick.

On delivery of the said houses, the respondents/plaintiffs found the followings:

(a) the height of the house, from floor to ceiling was only 9 feet;

(b) no asbestos ceiling installed;

(c) water PCC Vent - only 1 layer;

(d) roof rafters - were of various sizes and not from hardwood;

(e) no "hardcore" flooring;

(f) septic tank wall - only 4 3/4 inches thick.

For the double-storey houses, the approved plan provides for the followings:

(a) the height of the house shall be 20 ft. from floor to ceiling;

(b) asbestos ceiling to be installed;

(c) septic tank wall - 9 inches thick.

On delivery, the respondents/plaintiffs found the followings:

(a) the height of the house from floor to ceiling was only 18 ft.;

(b) no asbestos ceiling installed;

(c) septic tank wall - only 4 3/4 inches thick.

The appellant/defendant disputed the claim. The first case went on for full trial where the respondent/plaintiff (in that case) has called 16 witnesses. At the end of the respondents/plaintiff's case (in that case) both counsels for the respondents/plaintiffs and counsels for the appellant/defendant agreed that the facts and evidence adduced in the first case be also applicable to the other 25 cases. Along that line, the defence who has called three witnesses in the first case, was also to be applicable to all the other 25 cases as agreed by the parties.

At the end of the trial, the learned magistrate decided infavour of all the respondents/plaintiffs and found that the appellant/defendant was in breach of the respective agreements. In respect of the single-storey houses, the respective respondents/plaintiffs were awarded a sum of RM8,400 as compensation together with costs and interests (for each of them). While in respect of the double-storey houses, each of the respective respondents/plaintiffs were awarded a sum of RM4,5000 as compensation together with costs and interests.

The appellant/defendant, not being satisfied with all the 26 decisions, appealed to this court against all the 26 decisions separately and thus had filed 26 notices of appeal.

At the hearing of this appeal, both parties agreed to submit their written submissions which would be applicable for all the 26 appeals, as all the appeals involved the same set of facts and issues.

Whether The Said Decisions Are Appellable - Section 28(1), Courts Of Judicature Act 1964

It is not disputed that each and everyone of the 26 decisions involved awa