JUDGMENT

Suffian LP:

This appeal raises the question whether a person who is interested only in a specific portion of land may enter a caveat against the land. The caveator (appellant before us) says yes, the caveatees (respondents) say no, the learned Judge, agreeing with the caveatees decided no, and the caveator has appealed to us.

The facts are as follows. The late Mr. Ratnavale, no stranger to these Courts, owned Merah Estate in Kulim, Kedah, which he planned to subdivide and sell to various people. The caveator and two others rendered him some service in connection with the project. In consideration of the caveator's service Mr. Ratnavale agreed to give him a specific portion of the estate with the tindal's house on it "now occupied by [the caveator]" and the caveator has been in possession of that portion ever since.

The agreement was expressed as a written undertaking dated 22 December 1966, in the following words:

In the event of the satisfactory sale and completion of Merah Estate in Kulim, I [Ratnavale] hereby undertake to pay jointly

(1)N Vangedaselam of Kulim [the caveator]

(2)S Suppiah Chettiar of Bukit Mertajam

(3)K Nallamani Nadar of Kulim

for their services