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

2015 MarsdenLR 1023

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SANTHI KRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
MALAYSIA BUILDING SOCIETY BERHAD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. sale agreement and default (Para 1 , 2 , 5)
2. breach of conditions of sale (Para 6 , 12 , 13)
3. judicial notice and evidence in court (Para 18 , 21 , 26)
Idrus Harun JCA:

[1] On 3 February 2006, the appellant had entered into a sale and purchase agreement (the agreement) with the respondent for the purchase of a house at No 2, Tingkat Perpaduan 15, Taman Perpaduan, 31150 Ulu Kinta, Perak (the property). One of the terms of the agreement stipulates that the repayment of the housing loan shall be made by monthly instalments of RM400.00 every month until final settlement.

[2] In an action dated 7 July 2011 in which the respondent herein was the plaintiff, two orders were granted by the High Court on 21 November 2011 (the first order) and 29 August 2012 (the second order). The first order allowed the respondent to sell the property by way of a public auction under the direction of the Court. The second order fixed the reserve price of the property for the purpose of the sale at RM110,000.00. The date specified in the second order for the public auction was 29 November 2012. Both orders (the Orders for Sale) were made as the appellant was alleged to have breached the cha

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top