Abdul Kadir Sulaiman JCA (delivering judgment of the court):

On 16 March 2005, two appeals came up for hearing before us. One is Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003 and the other is Appeal No W–2–898 of 2004. The parties agreed that the disposal of Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003 would render Appeal No W-02-898-2004 academic. On that basis we commenced hearing of Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003. We had on that day, 16 March 2005, dismissed the appellant's appeal in Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003 with costs. In compliance with the agreement at the commencement of the hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant in Appeal No W–02–898 of 2004 withdrew that appeal. In the circumstance, that appeal was struck off with no order as to costs. We directed that the deposit be refunded to the appellant in that appeal. We now give our reasons for the dismissal of Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003.

The brief facts leading to Appeal No W–02–567 of 2003 are these. The appellant who was the defendant in the court below is the registered proprietor of a piece of land held under Grant No 10101, Lot No 14271, Setapak, Kuala Lumpur measuring approximately 283,026 square meters (‘the said land’).

The appellant and the respondent ent