(delivering the judgment of the Board): These consolidated appeals from the Federal Court of Malaysia raise issues regarding the validity of a notice of forfeiture of alienated land issued under the relevant provisions of the National Land Code 1965 ("the Code"), and also regarding the jurisdiction of the courts to grant relief against such forfeiture.

In December 1966 the State Authority of Johore alienated to the second appellants, under section 76 of the Code, approximately 20,680 acre of land in the district of Kota Tinggi for a term of 99 years in consideration of a stipulated annual rent and other conditions. The second appellants laid out very considerable sums of money in the development of the land for the purposes of a sugar plantation, and they also granted a number of charges over the land in favour of the first appellants, for the purpose of securing the repayment of loans which in November 1977 amounted to $ 5,334,163.60 with interest.

The rent payable by the second appellants in respect of the year 1977 was $ 124,080 plus education rate of $ 31,020. By virtue of section 94(2) of the Code that rent fell due on January 1, 1977, and, not having been paid before June 1, 1977, fell to be treated as having become in arrear on that date. Accordingly, the Collector of Land Revenue for the District, pursuant to section 97(1) of the Code, on June 2, 1977 caused to be served on the second appellants a notice of demand in terms of Form 6A in the First Schedule thereto. As required by section 98 the Collector also served a copy of the notice on the first appellants as chargees, so as to give them the opportunity of paying the rent themselves if they chose. The notice required payment of the rent together with penalties within the period of three months. Owing to misunderstandings between the appellants, neither rent nor penalties were paid by either of them within that period. Sections 99 and 100 of the Code provide as follows: --

"99. If the whole of the sum demanded by any notice under section 97

is tendered to the Collector within the time specified therein,

the notice shall thereupon cease to have effect, and the

Collector shall cancel, or cause to be cancelled, the note

endorsed pursuant to subsection (2) of that section on the

register document of title to the land to which the notice

related.

100. The Collector shall not during the period specified in any notice

under section 97 accept the tender by or on behalf of any person

or body of a lesser amount than the sum thereby demanded; and if

by the end of that period the whole of that sum has not been

tendered to him, he shall thereupon by order declare the land

forfeit to the State Authority, and the provisions of Part Eight

shall have effect with respect thereto accordingly."

On September 7, 1977 the Collector, who is the respondent to the appeals, made an order declaring the land forfeit to the State Authority, and this order, as required by section 130(1), was published in the Gazette on September 15, 1977.

On December 7, 1977 the appellants instituted proceedings by motion under section 418 of the Code, which provides:--

"418. (1) Any person or body aggrieved by any decision under this Act

of the State Commissioner, the Registrar or any Collector may, at

any time within the period of three months beginning with the

date on which it was communicated to him, appeal therefrom to the

Court.

(2) Any appeal shall be made in accordance with the provisions of any

written law for the time being in force relating to civil

procedure; and the Court shall make such order thereon as it

considers just.

(3) In this section "decision" includes any act, omission, refusal,

dir