YOUNG YEAN CHIN & ORS vs QUEK YAK KANG & ORS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 MarsdenLR 1610

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
YOUNG YEAN CHIN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
QUEK YAK KANG & ORS – Respondent

Table of Content
1. facts of the property and intentions of co-proprietors. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. arguments presented against the plaintiffs' application. (Para 7 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
3. final ruling and affirmation of the high court's decision. (Para 8 , 9 , 28)
4. court's observations on the affidavits and evidence. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 24)

Abdul Aziz Bin Abdul Rahim JCA:

[1] On 29 November 2014, the learned High Court Judge allowed the plaintiffs' originating summons dated 10 July 2014 against the defendants under O 7 r 2 Rules of 2012 [ROC 2012] to partition and hence terminate the co-proprietorship of a piece of undivided land known as Hakmilik Geran 85976 Lot No 3406 Bandar Maharani Daerah Muar Negeri Johor ("the said land") with no order as to costs. Dissatisfied with the order, the defendants appealed against the whole of the decision of the learned High Court Judge.

[2] Parties will be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants in the High Court.

Background Facts

[3] At all material times, the plaintiffs and the defendants are co-proprietors of the said land. The plaintiffs had appointed a land surveyor to make measurement and partition on the said lan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 MarsdenLR 1610

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAYOUNG YEAN CHIN & ORS – AppellantVersusQUEK YAK KANG & ORS – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
YOUNG YEAN CHIN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
QUEK YAK KANG & ORS – Respondent