2017 MarsdenLR 3474
HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK MIRI
SAGAU BATU BALA – Appellant
Versus
ZAHARAH MUSTAPHA RAJA SEWA & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: MYY-22-33-10-2012]
Claims of native customary rights over lands within a declared Native Communal Reserve must be adjudicated by Native Courts under customary law.
Headnote:This judgment addresses the disputes over Native Customary Rights (NCR) land claimed by the plaintiff and defendants within an established Native Communal Reserve. Key statutes referenced include section 6 of the Sarawak Land Code, which regulates rights under communal reserves. The court finds that both parties failed to prove their claims over the NCR land declared as a Native Communal Reserve, emphasizing the need for resolution of such disputes within the Native Courts.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of ncr claims in relation to ancestral rights. (Para 1) |
| 2. plaintiff claims ownership of ncr land. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
[1] The plaintiff claims to be the beneficial owner over NCR land described as Pak Puek, Block 14 Bario, Baram Sarawak and he commenced this suit against the 1st and 2nd defendants for trespass of the said NCR land which he allegedly had inherited from his mother Reberuh Tepun. The 3rd defendant is the intervener in this Original Action (OA).
[2] In the Amended Counterclaim (AC), the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs' action against the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th defendants are for declaration that they and their family members are the lawful owners and/ or heirs of the land area in between Pa Puek Bario and the new Bario Airport and land area near the Old Airport, Bario Sarawak, which they allegedly had inherited from their ancestors. The 3rd and 4th defendants are nominal defendants while the 8th defendant is the intervener. The 6th and 7th defendants had been struck out.
[3] The reliefs sought by the plaintiff in the OA are as follows:
(a) An order that the 1st and 2nd defendants do forthwith evacuate and remove all their servants, agents or workers and machineries from the plaintiff's land;
(b) A declaration that the 1st and 2nd defendants their servants, agents are not entitled to enter or interfere with any parts of the plaintiff's land at Pa Puek;
(c) An injunction to restrain the 1st and 2nd defendants, whether by themselves, their agents, servants or otherwise howsoever from further entering or interfering with the plaintiff's said land at Pak Puek;
(d) Special damages in the sum of RM1,000,000.00;
(e) General damages to be paid by the 1st and 2nd defendants for trespass to be assessed by this honourable court;
(f) Pre-judgment interest in respect to prayer (d) and (e) hereinbefore at such rate as the Chief Justice may from time to time determine or at such rate not exceeding the rate aforesaid as the court determines, from the cause of action accrues to the date of judgment unless otherwise ordered pursuant to s 11 of the Civil Law Act 1984;
(g) Interest on judgment at such rate as the Chief Justice may from time to time determine or at such rate not exceeding the rate aforesaid as the court determines, such interest to be calculated from the date of judgment until the judgment is satisfied pursuant to O 42 r 12 of the Rules of 2012;
(h) Punitive and/or exemplary damages to be given at the discretion of this honorable court;
(i) Cost including out of pocket expenses, solicitor's and client's costs to be paid by the defendants to the plaintiff;
(j) Cost of filing this Writ and anticipated Order:
(i) Writ of Summons : RM200.00
(ii) Order : RM200.00
Total : RM400.00
(k) Such further or other relief as this Honorouble court deems fit and proper to grant.
[4] The reliefs sought by the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs in the AC are as follows:
1. A declaration that the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs and their family members are the lawful owners and/or heir of the land area in between Pa Puek Bario and the new Bario and land area near the Old Airport, Bario Sarawak, which they inherited from their ancestors down to the 1st and 2nd plaintiffs.
2. A declaration that the 1st defendant Sagau Batu Bala had presented a false claim by his original action against Zahara Mustapha Raja Sewa and Mustapha Raja Sewa Abdullah;
3. Damages and punitive damages against the 1st and 3rd defendants;