Back
Next 
2017 MarsdenLR 2077
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KALIAMMAH MUTHU – Appellant
Versus
VALEE KARUPPEN – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: P-02(NCVC)W-1906-10-2016]
The absence of clear intent to create a trust results in legal ownership remaining with registered proprietors despite financial contributions.
Headnote:In this case, the court addressed the question of trust regarding property ownership among family members. The main appellant contended that beneficial ownership was misappropriated by the second respondent despite contributions to purchase. The court concluded there was insufficient evidence for a resulting trust in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the need for clear intent in creating a trust as required by law. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the prior ruling of the High Court.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the appeal context. (Para 1) |
[1] The appeal before us was against the decision of the learned Judicial Commissioner in the Pulau Pinang High Court given on 9 September 2016 allowing the plaintiff's claim against the 2nd defendant. We had, after perusing the records of appeal as well as considering the written and oral submissions of learned counsel unanimously allowed the appeal with no order as to costs. We set aside the High Court and ordered that the deposit to be refunded to the appellant. We now give our reasons for the decision.
