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

2004 MarsdenLR 1040

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
TIA AH LENG – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Hazman Ahmad ,Respondent Advocate: Shahrizal Shaari DPP

JUDGMENT

Mokhtar Sidin JCA:

[1] The appellant appealed against the sentence imposed on him by the High Court when he pleaded guilty to an amended charge under s 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (the Act) which is punishable under s 39A(2) of the Act. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and ten strokes of the rotan. We have dismissed the appeal earlier and we now give our reasons for doing so.

[2] The facts of the case. The wife of the appellant, Lew Sin Kiow, was the owner of the semi - detached house No 39 Jalan Hujan Emas, Taman OUG, Kuala Lumpur She and her family stayed at another semi - detached house No 41, but this house was not attached to house No 39. Apparently, the two houses were separated by a fence. On 25 March 1997, she entered into a sale and purchase agreement to sell house No 39 to one Chan Poh Lan. Chan Poh Lan took the keys to the house from Lew Sin Kiow to do some renovations and when the renovations were completed the said Chan Poh Lan returned the keys to the appellant's wife because the said Chan Poh Lan had not paid the full purchase price. Only on 20 August 1997, the said Chan Poh Lan obtained the keys to the house from her solicitors. The appellant bo

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