JUDGMENT

Mathew CJ (with whom Spenser Wilkinson J agreed):

This is a claim for specific performance of an agreement for the sale of a parcel of land in a Malay Reservation. Included in the agreement was a provision that if the transfer of the land was not effected a penalty would be paid. The points for decision were: -

(a) did the defendant-respondent make the agreement for sale ?

(b) if so, was the plaintiff-appellant entitled to specific performance or to damages?

The defence simply was that the agreement for sale was a forgery. There was much evidence given during the hearing of the case to the effect that the agreement for sale was part of a loan transaction. The learned trial Judge (quoting from his judgment) found:

That the document sued upon is genuine in the sense that it was written out on the date which it purports to bear and that it was signed by the defendant after it was written.

And came to the conclusion that the document sued on was not a contract for the sale of land, but was a contract relating to and connected with a loan made by the plaintiff either to the defendant or to somebody else for whom the defendant stood surety. As a result, the learned trial Ju