Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA IPOH
DR CHRISTIAN JURGEN KAUL & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
MERU VALLEY RESORT BHD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on property dispute (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding water supply rights (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. claims and counterclaims by parties (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. pleading requirements for nuisance claims (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. importance of detailed pleading (Para 11 , 15 , 19) |
| 6. importance of adherence to pleadings. (Para 13 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 20) |
| 7. balancing vagueness in pleadings. (Para 21) |
| 8. defining nuisance and its elements (Para 22 , 23) |
| 9. defining nuisance through reasonableness. (Para 24) |
[1] The plaintiffs had been staying in the Meru Valley Resort ("resort") in Ipoh for a while in a rented place before they decided to buy one of their own. It is a new concept of living in a Golf Resort within a gated and guarded community developed by the defendant, a housing developer. There are common property, areas and facilities that all who are residents there could enjoy.
[2] The plaintiffs bought a vacant land known as Lot No 259 ("the said land") in the resort from a previous owner vide a sale and purchase agreement dated 7 December 2009. The plaintiffs wanted to tap into the water supply provided by the defendant. The defendant said that the plaintiffs must firs
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
