SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 MarsdenLR 4584 ; 2008 MarsdenLR 1

GOPAL SRI RAM, HELILIAH MOHD YUSOF, AHMAD MAAROP
SENTUL RAYA SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
HARIRAM JAYARAM & ORS AND OTHER APPEALS – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

[1] This is the judgment of the court.

[2] There are ten appeals before us today. They all give rise to common issues. In four of them there are cross appeals. We have heard a single argument from either side in all the appeals as well as the cross appeals. The relevant facts are as follows.

[3] The appellant is a housing developer. Its activities are controlled and regulated by the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1966 ("the Act") and the Regulations made thereunder. From about 1995 to about 1997 the appellant entered into a number of agreements including those which are the subject matter of these appeals with members of the public to sell to them apartments in a condominium which the appellant had agreed to construct. Later, it transpired that the appellant was unable to make delivery of the apartments to the respondent in the ten appeals now before us. These respondents then brought actions to recover damages for delay of delivery of vacant possession of each of their apartments. In all these cases concerned, the High Court which heard the cases found for the respondents on the issue of liability. However in four of the suits the High

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top