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



JUDGMENT

Chao Hick Tin J:

This is an application by the plaintiff under s. 111(1) of the Land Title Act to remove two caveats lodged by the defendant.

After hearing submissions of the parties on 28 November 1991, I decided to remove both the caveats on the ground that they are not in compliance with the requirements of s. 104 of the Act and the form prescribed there under. The defendant has appealed against the order and I now give my reasons.

On 8 June 1990, the plaintiff, Rafiq Jumabhoy, through his attorney, granted an option to one Ms. Ho Poh Lin to purchase the plaintiffs property at 36, Ewe Boon Road, Singapore. To exercise the option the grantee was required to sign the acceptance copy of the option and deliver the same with the requisite payment to the grantor's solicitors on or before 4 pm on 8 August 1990. Clause 13 of the option gave the grantee "the right to nominate another party who is either a Singapore citizen or a Singapore company ... to execute this option provided that (the grantee) sign(s) and return(s) the nomination form attached to this option.

For reasons which I need not go into at this time (as they are not relevant), on 6 August 1990 Jumabhoy instructed

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