The validity of the 1974 Agreement is contingent upon statutory approvals, which the appellant failed to secure, rendering the agreement unenforceable.

Introduction

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant (the plaintiff) against the decision of the High Court at Muar given on 24 June 2015, dismissing the appellant's claim and allowing the respondent's (the defendant's) counterclaim with costs.

[2] The appellant sought the following reliefs:

(1) A declaration that the Agreement of Sale and Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 25 June 1974 remains valid and binding on the respondent under prayer 26(xvi) of the statement of claim;

(2) Either,

(a) An order of specific performance of the Agreement and Irrevocable Power of Attorney dated 25 June 1974 directing the respondent to deliver to the appellant the following original documents:

(i) The issue of title for the said land; and

(ii) The quit rent receipt for the said land for the current year, within 14 days from the date hereof failing which the appellant may apply to the Land Office for the issuance of a replacement title, for the appellant to submit fresh application(s) for approval of the "Penguasa Negeri" to transfer the said land from the respondent to any proposed transferee nominated by the appellant.

Or alternatively,

(b) An order that the title to the said land be cancelled under prayer 26(xvi) of the statement of claim;

(c) An order for specific performance of the 1974 Agreement and Irrevocable Power of Attorney directing the respondent to submit the "Assignment of Rights in Expectation of Title" for the Collector's approval as per prayer 26(ii) of the Statement of Claim within 14 days from the date of this order, failing which the Senior Assistant Registrar of the High Court shall be empowered to execute all necessary documents on behalf of the respondent for that purpose;

(3) A declaration that the appellant is entitled to possession of the said land under prayer 26(xvi) of the statement of claim;

(4) An injunction to restrain the respondent from entering the said land under prayer 26(xvi) of the statement of claim;

(5) An order for damages for loss of income at RM3,000.00 per month from 6 May 2005 until possession of the said land is delivered to the appellant to be paid by the respondent to the appellant under prayer 26(vii) and (xiv) of the statement of claim;

(6) Costs here and below to be paid by the respondent to the appellant as per prayer 26(xv) of the statement of claim.

[3] The learned counsel for the appellant impressed upon us to mould the relief that is to be granted on the particular facts of this case: see the judgment of Gopal Sri Ram JCA (as he then was) in the Court of Appeal case of Sinar Wang Sdn Bhd v. Ng Kee Seng , .

[4] The respondent counterclaimed against the appellant for:

(a) A declaration that the 1974 Agreement is null and void and is no longer binding;

(b) An injunction prohibiting the appellant or his nominee(s) from entering private caveat on the respondent's said land held under GM 1093 Lot No 3673, Mukim Jementah, Segamat;

(c) An injunction to restrain the appellant whether by himself or by his workers or servants or agents or otherwise howsoever from entering on the respondent's said land held under GM 1093 Lot No 3673, Mukim Jementah, Segamat or any part thereof;

(d) An order directing the appellant to demolish the tomb erected on the said land within 60 days from the date of the judgment; and

(e) Costs of this action.

Background Facts

[5] Briefly, the facts are these. The respondent's father, Pua Deck Kee, (deceased) was given a right to occupy a piece of land/holding in a Group Settlement Area held under RH 17 Lot 3673 GSA Batu 9, Mukim Jementah, Segamat in expectation of title by Pesuruhjaya Tanah Dan Galian on 19 November 1961. B