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

2025 MarsdenLR 3845

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
AHMAD HUSAIRI ALI & ORS – Appellant
Versus
SUDITASIA (M) SDN BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:R Vigneswaran Raju,Roshini Ramasamy,Lavaniya Balan ,Respondent Advocate: Chris Y H Tan,Nur Syahirah Ramli

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) Plaintiffs have rights to obtain strata titles from the defendant under STA 1985. - (!) (!) SPAs entered between 2004-2014; statutory duty to apply for subdivision/strata titles; six months/three months timelines as per STA amendments. - (!) (!) First issue confined to Category A (Schedule H SPAs) as to breach regarding obtaining strata titles; Category B and C excluded from that issue. - (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) Trial held; defendant delayed in obtaining strata titles; no third-party delay evidence accepted; court found failure to obtain within a reasonable time. - (!) Category A plaintiffs proved losses due to both contractual and statutory breaches; evidence supported deprivation of ownership and impact on ability to sell/use property. - (!) (!) (!) Damages awarded: RM10,000 per plaintiff with 5% interest from filing date; not RM50,000 per plaintiff. - (!) (!) Reliefs: decree for specific performance and costs RM30,000 (allocatur). - (!) (!) Distinction and analysis of SPA types to identify applicable contractual clauses governing strata title obligations. - (!) Law places statutory duty on developer to apply for strata titles; no exemption in STA 1985. - (!) (!) (!) 3rd Issue finding deprivation of usage/enjoyment due to failure to deliver strata titles. - (!) (!) Distinguishes authorities in quantum; supports RM10,000 per plaintiff.

What is the defendant's breach status regarding obtaining individual strata titles under the STA 1985, and what damages/reliefs flow from that breach?

What factors justify awarding damages to the plaintiffs for deprivation of usage and enjoyment due to the failure to deliver strata titles, and what is the quantum?

What is the court’s determination on which categories of SPAs (Category A Schedule H SPAs, Category B CCC SPAs, Category C Sub-sale SPAs) are applicable to the first issue and the extent of the relief granted?


JUDGMENT

Aliza Sulaiman J:

[1] The Plaintiffs commenced the action after waiting between 8 years to 18 years since they purchased their respective residential units at the "Ampang Boulevard Condominium" for their strata titles where the developer was the defendant.

[2] After having considered the pleadings, the oral and documentary evidence and written submissions and oral clarification by the learned counsel representing the parties, on 26 June 2025, I allowed the plaintiffs' claim for:

(a) a decree for specific performance to be issued against the defendant requiring the defendant to complete the process of subdividing the building and delivering the strata titles for each of the units to the Plaintiffs;

(b) damages for the losses incurred due to the defendant's delay in completing the process to deliver the strata title to the plaintiffs in the sum of RM10,000.00 to each plaintiff with interest at the rate of 5% per annum from 15 February 2022 (date of filing of the Writ and Statement of Claim) until full realisation; and

(c) costs of RM30,000.00, subject to allocatur.

[3] The Defendant is aggrieved with the entire decision while the plaintiffs are dissatisfied by part of the decision


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