Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ONE VISA SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
TELEKOM MALAYSIA BERHAD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's claim for trespass and damages. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of land ownership and squatters. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. plaintiff's claims regarding defendant's alleged actions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. establishment of trespass under common law. (Para 17 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. historical context of infrastructure placement. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. importance of state permission for infrastructure. (Para 39 , 42) |
| 7. plaintiff's purchase 'as is where is' principle. (Para 53 , 56 , 58) |
| 8. assessment of rental value and defendant's obligation. (Para 59 , 60 , 63) |
| 9. plaintiff's unsubstantiated claims for quit rent. (Para 65 , 66) |
[1] In brief, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is for trespass on the plaintiff's lands, and damages arising from the trespass.
[2] By this writ action the plaintiff seeks judgment against the defendant for a total sum of RM221,472,061.00. In the statement of claim, the plaintiff applied for the following reliefs:
(a) A declaration that the defendant is a trespasser on the lands and is a nuisance to the plaintiff;
(b) Special damages amounting to RM23,077,116.00 being the total rental value of the lands based on its curr
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
