Squatters have no legal rights or interests over state land, emphasizing the absence of lawful possession.

S Nantha Balan J:

(After Full Trial)

Introduction

[1] These are my grounds after a full trial. This is essentially an action by the registered owner of a parcel of land together with a developer with whom the registered owner had entered into a development agreement to develop the land. However, the land was/is occupied by dwellers (described by the plaintiffs as squatters), who have refused to move out and give vacant possession. The plaintiffs are seeking orders of vacant possession and an order to allow the buildings and structures on the land to be demolished. The plaintiffs also seek general, aggravated and exemplary damages. The defendants did not file any counterclaim to seek any legal remedies or equitable reliefs. The plaintiffs called two (2) witnesses and the defendants called four (4) witnesses.

[2] At the outset, it is necessary to mention that during the pre-trial case management, there was no request for the trial to be bifurcated into liability and quantum stages. Indeed, it was clear all along that parties are to establish both liability and quantum during the trial. The trial (on liability and quantum) was completed on 27 December 2017. I will start with the plaintiffs' synopsis.

The Proposed Development

[3] The 1st plaintiff ("P1") is the local authority for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur and is (with effect from 18 May 2016) the registered owner of a parcel of land in Kepong, Kuala Lumpur They entered into a sale and purchase agreement with the 2nd plaintiff ("P2") for a mixed development project to be undertaken on the parcel of land. The proposed development included the construction of affordable housing which was to be priced and sold as per conditions stipulated by P1 and as per the Government of Malaysia's affordable Housing Policy. However, P2 was not able to commence the development project due to the presence of houses/structures on the land. These houses and structures were erected on the land since around 1979. The defendants are the owners/occupiers of these houses/structures. The houses/structures are not homogenous and some are wooden structures whilst others are made of brick and wood. Others houses/structures are completely made of brick.

[4] The suit was filed for a declaration that the defendants have no proprietary rights of ownership in or over the land and that they are occupying the land without the consent or permission of the plaintiffs, and are squatters. The plaintiffs are seeking an order of vacant possession so as to evict the defendants and for the building structures to be demolished. The plaintiffs are also seeking general, aggravated and exemplary damages against the defendants.

The Land

[5] The land in question was formerly known as Lot 80782, Kampung Chiam Lee, Mukim Batu, Kuala Lumpur The present title details of the land are: HS(D) 120095, PT26880, Mukim Batu, Daerah Kuala Lumpur, Negeri Wilayah Persekutuan KL, measuring approximately 59073 square metre. I shall refer to it interchangeably as "Lot 80782" or "the land". P1 is the local authority for Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur and is a body corporate pursuant to s 5 of the Federal Capital Act 1960 (Revised 1977) (Act 190) and they are the registered owner of the land. The defendants are the present occupiers of these houses. Many of the defendants are descendants of the original persons who built the houses on the land. The title to the land is not and was never registered in the names of any of the defendants. The defendants have been described in these proceedings as "squatters".

[6] The land was alienated to P1 on 18 May 2016 (pp 1-3 B). P1 entered into a sale and purchase agreement dated 30 August 2016 with P2 ("the SPA") whereby P1 had agreed to sell and P2 had a