Raja Azlan Shah J:

This case is of some significance as it involves important principles of law. The plaintiff is asking for a declaration that he is the beneficial owner of the land comprised in Extract from the Mukim Register No. 307, Lot 237 Mukim of Sungei Panjang in the District of Sabak Bernam in the State of Selangor (hereinafter referred to as the said land) and other consequential relief. His case is based on the following premises. His mother owned the said land. She died in 1938. He is the sole beneficiary of his mother's estate which comprised the said land only. In September 1940 he entered into an agreement with the defendant's father (since deceased) to sell the said land for a consideration of $400. Both duly executed a memorandum of transfer in the required form before the Assistant Collector of Land Revenue who attested it. The plaintiff now claims that as the EMR 307 was still in his mother's name he could not perfect the purchaser's title. He therefore testified that as a result the collector returned to him the document of title and to the purchaser the purchase price. He took no steps to register his name in the EMR until December 1961 when he applied for distribution under the Probate and Administration Enactment. From the time of his mother's death till the time of the said application he had left the said land which he claimed was looked after during that period by his sister and later by his nephew. The hearing eventually was fixed in February 1963 on which day he was absent. The defendant was granted letters of administration of the estate. In August 1963 the plaintiff entered a caveat and in February 1964 he issued this writ against the defendant as administrator of his mother's estate.

The defendant claimed that the said land was sold to his late father in September 1940. The memorandum of transfer was duly executed and was attested by the Assistant Collector of Land Revenue. The registration of the memorandum of transfer could not be effected as the document of title was with the plaintiff and he had failed to bring it with him. His father died in May 1941. In his defence the defendant avers:

Para 1. The defendant then never knew the plaintiff's whereabouts and his occupation until the defendant received a letter from the plaintiffs solicitors, Messrs. Rajendra & Teik Ee, some time in November 1963.

Para 2. The defendant objects as the plaintiff had sold the land under EMR 307 Lot No. 237 in the Mukim of Sungei Panjang, in the District of Sabak Bernam, to defendant's late father, Menan bin Yet then of Sungei Panjang, Sabak Bernam, for $400 cash when the said land was under blukar and uncultivated. The plaintiff executed a memorandum of transfer of the said land in favour of the defendant's father, Menan bin Yet (for the whole share) who was then alive before the Collector of Land Revenue, Sabak Bernam, on 26 September 1940, and the same was duly stamped on 30 September 1940, at the Stamp Office, Sabak Bernam. The registration of memorandum of transfer could not be accepted by the Land Office, Sabak Bernam, then as the titledeed of the raid land was not left in the Land Office, Sabak Bernam, and was in the hands of the plaintiff. The defendant's late father then sought for the title deed from the plaintiff, but the plaintiff was found to have shifted to some other place outside Sabak Bernam unknown to the defendant's late father and the defendant's family. The plaintiff left Sabak Bernam with all his family.

Para 4. Since then the defendant's father and family cultivated the said land and planted it with coconuts and enjoyed the income derived from the said land without any hindrance, objection or claims by the plaintiff or anyone. The defendant had been paying the quit rent annually except for the year 1962, 1963 and 1964 in which the quit rent was paid in the early part of the year by someone unknown to the defendant.

Para 6. The defendant prays that all the claims of the plaintiff