[1] This case has a checkered history. It first came before this court for leave to appeal pursuant to s 96(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (the Act). It was refused. The appellants applied for a review under r 137 of the Rules of the Federal 1995. Despite being sparingly exercised this court ruled that this is another rare but an appropriate case for the exercise of the inherent power of this court as envisaged in r 137. Gurbachan Singh Bagawan Singh & Anor v. Vellasamy Pennusamy & Ors & Other Applications, 2012 MarsdenLR 1739 .

[2] Upon re-hearing of the leave application this court granted leave and allowed five Leave questions for consideration (the Leave Questions). They are as follows:

[3] The Leave Questions may be categorised into two parts. Questions 1 and 2 deal with the relationship between the 1st and 2nd appellants and the respondents. Questions 3 to 5 deal with the claims of the respondents on the estate land. In our view Questions 1 and 2 may be determined on their own merits. They are not dependent on the determination of Questions 3 to 5. Nevertheless the status of the estate land at all material times may be relevant in the assessment of damages should liab