PS Gill J:

An appeal has been lodged against my decision of June 2001 wherein I had granted judgment for the plaintiff for specific performance of an oral agreement made on 17 March 1973, in respect of land commonly known as CT 23286, for Lot 40415, Mukim Ulu Kinta, with a house erected thereon (hereinafter called "property'). I had equally ordered that all rentals that the plaintiff had paid towards the said property be refunded. However, I dismissed prayer (c), (d) and (e) of the plaintiff's claim as I was of the view that these claims had not be proved by the plaintiff on a balance of probabilities.

Not uncommonly, the suit in question was basically a family dispute, between siblings, and in-laws, in respect of the property CT 23286, Lot 40415, Mukim Ulu Kinta. An entire family was divided over the said property, and the suit revolved over broken promises made in respect of the said property. This scenario will unfold as I plod through the narrative of evidence that emerged in the course of the trial.

I have decided not to dwell on all the evidence that was tendered in the course of the trial as most of it was repetitive in nature, redundant and equivocal.

The factual m