JUDGMENT

Syed Agil Barakbah FJ:

This is an appeal against the decision of the learned Judge given in the High Court, Kuala Lumpur on 24 January 1983 relating to the determination of the market value of a piece of land held under Certificate of Title No. 3727, Lot No. 2388, Mukim of Batu, District of Gombak, in the State of Selangor. This 147 acres of land is owned by 14 co-proprietors in undivided shares of which the appellant is the registered owner of 800/23670 shares. It was part of Sungai Tua Estate which had undergone fragmentation.

The Selangor State Government decided to acquire the whole of said land for the purpose of sub-dividing and distributing to the landowners who had been displaced due to the construction of a dam for a flood control scheme involving their lands at Batu. All the necessary requirements under ss. 3 to 7 of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 having been complied with, a declaration of intended acquisition under s. 8 was published in the State Government Gazette on 10 April 1980 (p. 43 of record). On 15 May 1980 a public notice of inquiry of the intended acquisition was issued by the Collector of Land Revenue, Gombak under s. 10 and on 15 May 1980 notices requiring statements in writing were issued under s. 11(2) of the Act (pp. 45 and 46 of record). The Collector held an enquiry under s. 12 on 13 September 1980 and completed it on 13 November 1980. He assessed the whole of the scheduled land in the sum of RM2,219,620 at RM15,000 per acre as compensation to be awarded to all the registered co-owners who were subsequently served with the required notice under s. 14 (pp. 51 and 52 of record). Notices were also issued under s. 22 to enable the Collector to take formal possession of the scheduled land. All the 14 co-proprietors being dissatisfied with the Collector's award which they accepted under protest filed a written application to the Collector requiring him to refer the matter to the High Court for determination by virtue of s. 38 (p. 7 to 9 of record).

The appellant's reference was heard by Wan Hamzah J with the aid of two assessors on 17 January 1983 and completed on 24 January 1983. The award by the learned Judge amounted to RM2,413,125 from which the appellant was entitled to RM81,600 being the value of his sool 23 & 70 shares and the value of the scheduled land worked out to RM16,311.78 cts. per acre.

The appellant being dissatisfied with the decision has now appealed to this Court. The decision of this Court was agreed upon to be binding on all the other co-proprietors who had earlier objected to the award.

There are ten grounds of appeal which are overlapping and inter-connected but the crux of the appeal relates to the method by which the trial Judge adopted in arriving at the valuation of the scheduled land. He accepted the valuation of RM30,000 per acre valued by the appellant's valuer and applied it to the north west portion of the scheduled land covering 12 acres 3 roods and 30 poles in area. For the rest of the 135 acres he accepted the valuation by the Collector's valuer at RM15,000 per acre. Having obtained the total sum of RM2,413,125 for the whole area, he then assessed the appellant's 800/23670 shares and awarded the sum of RM81,600 as compensation. In other words he sub-divided the scheduled land into two separate portions and valued them separately instead of valuing the land as a whole.

Under the Act there is no provision relating to the method of valuation. However the Courts have adopted the principle of valuing the scheduled land as a whole especially in cases where the area is large and owned by numerous individual owners in different portions. In Chuah Say Hai & Ors. V. Collector Of Land Revenue, Kuala Lumpur [1967], Gill J's ruling in that case was later re-affirmed by their Lordships of the Privy Council in Collector of Land Revenue v. Allagappa Chettiar [1971] 1 MLJ 43, 46, which held that under the Land Acquisition Act, 1960 the scheduled lands are to be valued as a whole. The l