The statutory provisions prohibit appeals against compensation awards made under the Land Acquisition Act once finalized.

[1] This was an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the learned Judicial Commissioner ("JC") in respect of a land acquisition matter. On 21 December 2015, the learned JC, aided by two assessors, made the following award:

[2] The learned JC also ordered that interest of 8% per annum be paid on the additional compensation sum awarded pursuant to s 48 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 ("the Act").

[3] Being dissatisfied with the decision, the appellant has now appealed to this COURT.

Background Facts

[4] The background facts of the case may be shortly stated as follows. The appellants land, described as GM17277, Lot 701, Mukim Paya Rumput, District of Melaka Tengah, Melaka, was subjected to acquisition under the Act for the purpose of "Tapak Pencawang Masuk Utama".

[5] The said land was gazetted for acquisition pursuant to s 8 of the Act vide Warta Kerajaan Negeri Melaka No 484 dated 21st August 2014. The land concerned was part of an estate land known as Ladang Bertam. The total land area of Lot 701 was 7.7926 hectares (77926 sq meters) and the land area to be acquired was 44900 sq meters.

[6] In the mid-section of Lot 701 was a Tenaga Nasional Bhd. ("TNB") rentis measuring 5,365.73 sq meters. TNB only acquired a right of way on part of Lot 701. The right of way was registered on 30th April 2002.

[7] The Land Administrator conducted an enquiry pursuant to s 12 of the Act to determine the amount of compensation payable to the appellant. At the conclusion of the enquiry, the Land Administrator awarded compensation in the sum of RM2,238,972.00.

[8] On 11th December 2014, the appellant objected to the amount of compensation awarded by the Land Administrator by filing form N, requesting the Land Administrator to refer the matter to the COURT for its determination pursuant to s 38 of the Act.

[9] The appellant raised the following arguments in support of its claim:

(a) The Land Administrator was wrong to award compensation on the basis that the land concerned was part of estate land;

(b) The acquisition of the land has injurious effect on the appellants remaining land. The building of the Tapak Pencawang Utama would lower the value of the remaining land; and

(c) The acquisition will result in the appellant having no access road to the appellants other lands.

[10] As alluded to earlier, the learned JC heard the land reference with the aid of two assessors pursuant to s 40A of the Act.

[11] In his judgment at pp 21 - 22 of the Record of Appeal, the learned JC had this to say:

"12. Hence, the two assessors are of the view that the land should be valued as agriculture land with development potential. A reading of s 40D(1) of the LAA shows that the assessors have the discretion to choose the comparable for purposes of preparing their respective opinion on the land value for me to value. All that is required from them is to make adjustments based on the features of the subject land shown by the evidence in this case.

13. On the issue of injurious effect to the applicant as a result of the acquisition, I concur with the two assessors that there exist none. Although the acquisition is intended for purposes of erecting "Tapak Pencawang Masuk Utama" as declared in the gazette Notification, the TNB transmission lines and rentice have been in existence on the land prior to the acquisition (see p 6 para 1 and Appendix V of the Applicants Valuation Report). This has already caused the value of the land to diminish. Therefore, the submission that the building of the Tapak Pencawang Utama will lower the value of the remaining land is therefore, a non-starter.

...

15. On the issue