(delivering the judgment of the Board): These appeals consolidated by Order of the Federal Court of Malaysia of February 4, 1979 were heard together. There is no significant difference between them either in point of fact or in the applicable law. Also the parties are agreed that the result of the first-named appeal will determine the fate of the second. Their Lordships accordingly recite only the facts of the first appeal but the advice which they will tender to His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong will apply equally to both appeals.

The appellant was at all material times a licensed housing developer under the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) Act, 1966 ("the Act") and the Housing Developers Control and Licensing Rules, 1970 ("the rules"), made pursuant to section 24 of the Act.

In 1972 the appellant owned a large area of land situated at Taman Sri Tebrau, Johore Bahru, Johore, which it proposed to develop as a housing estate, erecting thereon some 1,720 houses of various types, making provision for roads and services for various community purposes. Late in 1972, with a view to attracting the attention of persons seeking to obtain by purchase residential accommodation, the appellant placed on view at its office in the O.C.B.C. Building, Johore Bahru, its plan of sub-division of the land and plans of the various types of dwelling houses proposed to be erected thereon. Neither the plan of sub-division of the land nor the plans for the dwelling houses had then been approved by the local authorities. The appellant expected that it would take one or two years to obtain these approvals. Construction of the housing could not begin until those approvals were in hand.

On October 1, 1972 the respondent, desiring to purchase a house, attended at the office of the appellant and there inspected the sub-division plan and the plans and a model of a semi-detached house which suited his purpose. He was satisfied with the location and dimensions of Lot 949 and with the plans of the semi-detached house. He was told that neither the sub-division nor the building plan had been approved and that it would be some time before construction of the house could begin. The respondent was prepared to wait for the necessary period and decided to purchase the land and building.

Having so decided he paid to the appellant on that day the sum of $700 and received therefor the appellant's receipt for that sum as "the Booking Fee for Lot No. 949 — Single storey, semi-detached". He also signed that day two copies of a document bearing the appellant's name and headed "Booking Proforma". This was a document prepared by the appellant and apparently was in general use by it in connection with the disposal of lots in the estate. As the question in these appeals turns exclusively in their Lordships' view upon the true construction of this document read against the background of the rules it should be set out in full. "BOOKING PROFORMA

NAME OF INTENDING PURCHASER:

Mr. Mathew Lui Chin Teck (NRIC 0690161)

ADDRESS: Post Office, Kota Tinggi, Johore.

LOT No. BOOKED (as per Company's layout): 949

APPROXIMATE BASIC AREA: 2,800 sq. ft.

TYPE OF HOUSE: Single-storey Semi-detached.

PURCHASE PRICE DOLLARS: Twenty six thousand only ($26,000.00) only.

I, the above-named Mathew Lui Chin Treck hereby agree to purchase the above Lot together with the house as specified at the above stated price for which a Booking Fee of $700 is now paid to the Company subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. That within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a notice by the Company, sent to my above address, I shall pay to the Company or its Solicitors, M/s. A.L. Looi of Rooms 401 & 402, 4th Floor, O.C.B.C. Building, Johore Bahru, Johore the sum of $2,600 and sign the Agreement For Sale with the Company which shall be prepared by the Solicitors and subject to the terms and conditions thereto.

2. That I have inspected the Company's layout and building plans an