Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA JOHOR BAHRU
SEMBAGAVALLY MURUGASON – Appellant
Versus
TEE SENG HOCK – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for specific performance of a sale and purchase agreement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claim for specific performance of a sale agreement. (Para 4) |
| 3. evidence of loans and their implications on property ownership. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. procedural rules regarding the proof of signatures. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. evidence standards for signatures under the evidence act. (Para 23) |
| 6. burden of proof in allegations of forgery. (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 7. indefeasibility of title principles. (Para 67) |
| 8. illegality of the contract under the national land code. (Para 68 , 69 , 70) |
[1] In a nutshell, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is for specific performance of a sale and purchase agreement ("SPA") dated 12 April 2016 for the sale of land of 707sqm described as PN 16508 Lot 76511, Mukim Pulai, Daerah Johor Bahru, Johor, together with a double-storey bungalow house addressed at No 1GL-114700, Taman Mutiara Rim 81300 Skudai Johor ("the Land"), that is, for the defendant to pay the alleged purchase price of RM2.7 million; or alternatively for the Land to be returned to the plaintiff at the defendant's expense.
[2] The defendant counterclaimed for vacant possession of
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
