SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img



JUDGMENT

The plaintiff [appellant] commenced this action on 13 May 1987 as the registered proprietor of premises and land known as 124 Malacca Street, Penang. The defendant [respondent] is the owner of the neighbouring land and premises known as 126, 126A, 126B along the same road, which the defendant bought in 1976. After purchasing the said land, the defendant demolished the existing one-storey building and constructed a three-storey dwelling house in its place. The plaintiff alleged that as a direct result of the defendant's building construction work the plaintiff's plot of land and dwelling house sustained serious damage and had continued to deteriorate.

Paragraph 6 of the statement of claim says:

Despite the protests and damage caused to the plaintiff's neighbouring property as stated the defendant continued with the construction work until 1979 when the said construction work was concluded.

The plaintiff claims for:

(a) damages for inconvenience and mental anguish;

(b) special damages at RM17,040;

(c) interest;

(d) costs; and

(e) further and other reliefs.

The defendant in his defence, denies that his construction work had caused damage to the plaintiff's property. In para 9

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top