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

1991 MarsdenLR 57

HIGH COURT MALAYA ALOR SETAR
KU YAN KU ABDULLAH – Appellant
Versus
KU IDRIS KU AHMAD & ORS – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Zainal Rashid ,Respondent Advocate: George John

JUDGMENT

KC Vohrah J:

[1] The plaintiff is a co-proprietor of a piece of land to the extent of 5/7th undivided share. The 4 defendants are co-proprietors of the remaining 2/7th share. The land is comprised in SP No 24156, Lot 303, Mukim of Tajar, Kota Setar, Kedah.

[2] The plaintiff applied to the Land Administrator, Kota Setar for the land to be partitioned. When that application was made is not known but it is apparent from the affidavit filed by the plaintiff that the other co-proprietors neither joined in nor consented to the application. Presumably the application was made with s 141A of the National Land Code (the Code) in mind. The application was rejected. No reason was given for the rejection in the letter from the Director of Land and Mines, Kedah where the plaintiff was advised to apply to the High Court to partition the land. The plaintiff then applied to this Court to exercise its powers to partition the land under s 145 of the Code on 16 September 1989 in accordance with a proposed plan which was annexed to the supporting affidavit of this application and for the issuance of two title deeds, one for the plaintiff and another for the 4 defendants.

[3] There were several te

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