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



JUDGMENT

Charles NC Ho J:

The plaintiff in this action entered into a sale and purchase agreement with the 1st defendant on 6 September 1985, for the purchase of a shop house unit developed and built by the 1st defendant. Even though the plaintiff had fully paid the purchase price partly from her own money and partly from the loan she had taken from a credit company called S.Y. Jie Credit Sdn Bhd, the 1st defendant failed to transfer the said shop house unit to her name. Apparently the failure or inability of the 1st defendant in transferring the shop house unit to her was because the property was charged to the Sabah Bank and the 1st defendant was unable to redeem it. Subsequently the shop house unit purchased by the plaintiffs and the other unsold units were put up for sale by Sabah Bank pursuant to the charges with the bank. The plaintiff now brings this action to claim against all the defendants jointly and severally the sum of RM208,587 (which includes the purchase price and other expenses), damages, statutory interest, and costs.

At the outset of the trial counsel for the plaintiff informed the court that judgment in default had been entered against the 1st defendants' compan

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