The court confirmed the indefeasibility principle under the National Land Code does not apply when a title is obtained through illegal or fraudulent means.

[1] In a nutshell, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is for specific performance of a sale and purchase agreement ("SPA") dated 12 April 2016 for the sale of land of 707sqm described as PN 16508 Lot 76511, Mukim Pulai, Daerah Johor Bahru, Johor, together with a double-storey bungalow house addressed at No 1GL-114700, Taman Mutiara Rim 81300 Skudai Johor ("the Land"), that is, for the defendant to pay the alleged purchase price of RM2.7 million; or alternatively for the Land to be returned to the plaintiff at the defendant's expense.

[2] The defendant counterclaimed for vacant possession of the Land together with interest at a rate of 8% per year on its purported purchase price of RM2.7 million from 19 April 2016 until delivery of vacant possession; or alternatively for the plaintiff to return the sum of RM2.7 million plus RM54,599.99 (being the redemption sum for the Land).

The Background Facts

[3] The plaintiff vendor and the defendant purchaser signed the SPA and Form 14A of the National Land Code (" NLC ") on 12 April 2016 for the sale of the Land.

[4] On 27 November 2017, the defendant redeemed the property in the amount of RM54,599.49 from the chargee, Maybank Bhd, and on 2 January 2018, the Land was registered in the defendant's name.

[5] The SPA and Form 14A were attended to by the law firm of Messrs Chiong and Partners. Messrs Chiong and Partners was initially named as the 2nd defendant in this suit, but vide Order dated 19 November 2018, the plaintiff's claim against it was struck out.

The Plaintiff's Case

[6] The plaintiff's case is that after signing the SPA on 12 April 2016, no payments were forthcoming.

[7] The plaintiff claimed that she then contacted the defendant and Messrs Chiong and Partners but received no response.

[8] However, she subsequently received a Notice dated 27 March 2018 from Messrs Chiong and Partners to vacate the Land by or before 15 June 2018.

[9] The plaintiff informed her lawyers who proceeded to contact Messrs Chiong and Partners on 6 June 2018, requesting for specific performance of the contract.

[10] The plaintiff then lodged a Police Report No: 007225/18 on 10 August 2018, claiming that her signatures were forged on certain documents to facilitate the transfer of the Land to the defendant.

[11] The witnesses for the plaintiff were as follows:

(a) SP1 - the plaintiff herself;

(b) SP2 - Mohanadass Muthukrishnan, the husband of the plaintiff; and

(c) SP3 - Mohd Hashim Roshan Ngaspan, a co-director with the plaintiff in Save Gates Auto Sdn Bhd.

The Defendant's Case

[12] The defendant claims that prior to signing the SPA and Form 14A, the plaintiff had in fact borrowed a sum of RM2.2 million from the defendant.

[13] She then agreed to transfer the Land to off-set that loan; and since the Land was valued at RM2.7million, an amount of RM500,000.00 was paid to the plaintiff by the defendant, increasing the loan amount to a total of RM2.7million.

[14] According to the defendant, a Deed of Trust and a Power of Attorney, both dated 12 April 2016, were also signed by the plaintiff through which he claims rendered the defendant the beneficial owner, and the plaintiff a mere bare trustee.

[15] The defendant also referred to a Letter of Acknowledgement dated 12 April 2016 which he alleged was signed by the plaintiff, acknowledging receipt of the full purchase price of the Land in the amount of RM2.7 million.

[16] A Friendly