Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Court Power to Terminate Co-Proprietorship Without Subdivision - The courts have the authority under the National Land Code (NLC) to terminate co-proprietorship without necessarily ordering subdivision of land. Several sources confirm that the Court can make such order as it may think just for the purpose of enabling the co-proprietorship to be terminated ["
LAW WAI LING & ORS vs CHE RUSHITA @ RUSHITA ISMAIL & ORS - 2021 MarsdenLR 1399
"], ["NUSA ETIKA SDN BHD vs BUN AH TENG & ORS - 2021 MarsdenLR 2818
"], ["FARIDAH MD LAZIM (AS THE LAWFUL HOLDER OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY TO AHMAD ADAM) vs EDHAM ABD GHANI (A.... - High Court
"], ["KUMARADEVAN RAJADEVAN vs JEEVAMALAR KUMARASUBRAMANIAM - High Court
"], ["LOW PECK LIM vs LOW PECK SANG & ORS - 2025 MarsdenLR 1530
"]. This discretion allows the Court to resolve issues of co-ownership even if subdivision is not involved or desired.Discretion and Conditions for Termination - The Court's discretion under s 145 of the NLC is broad, permitting termination of co-proprietorship and related orders such as sale or partition, based on what is just and expedient. Notably, the Court does not require proof that termination is just, necessary or expedient ["
PERNIAGAAN USAHAKITA SDN BHD LWN. TENGKU DURAIDA TENGKU YOT & YANG LAIN - High Court
"], ["YOUNG YEAN CHIN & ORS vs QUEK YAK KANG & ORS - Court Of Appeal
"]. The Court considers various factors, including the refusal of co-proprietors to consent to subdivision, and may order termination without subdivision if deemed appropriate ["LAW WAI LING & ORS vs CHE RUSHITA @ RUSHITA ISMAIL & ORS - 2021 MarsdenLR 1399
"], ["FARIDAH MD LAZIM (AS THE LAWFUL HOLDER OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY TO AHMAD ADAM) vs EDHAM ABD GHANI (A.... - High Court
"].Subdivision Not a Prerequisite for Termination - Termination of co-proprietorship can occur independently of subdivision. Several cases emphasize that the Court's power to terminate is not contingent upon subdivision approval or the existence of a subdivision plan. For example, the Court is vested with the power to cause the co-proprietorship to be terminated and the alienated land be partitioned or subdivided when the co-proprietors refused to give consent pursuant to s 145 ["
FARIDAH MD LAZIM (AS THE LAWFUL HOLDER OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY TO AHMAD ADAM) vs EDHAM ABD GHANI (A.... - High Court
"], ["KUMARADEVAN RAJADEVAN vs JEEVAMALAR KUMARASUBRAMANIAM - High Court
"]. However, subdivision may be ordered if the co-proprietors agree or if conditions for subdivision are satisfied, but it is not mandatory for termination.Impact of Shareholding and Consent - The majority or minority shareholding does not bar a co-proprietor from applying for termination; the law explicitly states that a co-proprietor having the major share in a piece of land is not barred from applying ["
NUSA ETIKA SDN BHD vs BUN AH TENG & ORS - 2021 MarsdenLR 2818
"], ["NG CHAI HUAT vs NG CHAI KHING - High Court Malaya Taiping
"]. Also, applications for termination can be made even when some co-proprietors refuse consent, highlighting the Court’s discretionary power to resolve disputes without requiring all parties’ agreement or subdivision.Analysis and Conclusion:Based on the cited cases and legal provisions, co-proprietorship in land can indeed be terminated by the Court without subdivision. The Court has broad discretionary powers under s 145 of the NLC to make just orders, which include termination of co-ownership and sale of land, regardless of whether subdivision has been ordered or consented to by all co-owners. Subdivision is not a prerequisite for termination; instead, it is one of the options available to the Court to resolve co-ownership disputes.
Owning land jointly with others can lead to complications, especially when co-owners disagree on its future. A common question arises: can in land be terminated without subdivision? If you're a co-owner facing disputes or simply wanting to sell your share, understanding your options under Malaysian law is crucial. This post breaks down the legal framework, key court decisions, and practical considerations to help you navigate this issue.
Note: This article provides general information based on legal precedents and statutes. It is not a substitute for professional legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for advice tailored to your situation.
, also known as co-ownership, occurs when two or more individuals hold in a piece of land. Under the (NLC), this is governed primarily by Sections 342 and 343, which define when arises, such as through inheritance or joint purchase.
While co-owners enjoy joint rights, conflicts often emerge over management, sale, or division. Traditionally, subdivision—physically dividing the land into separate lots—might seem like the solution. However, Malaysian courts have clarified that termination doesn't always require this step.
The cornerstone for terminating is , titled Power of Court to facilitate termination of . This section empowers courts to:- Order the of land, or- Make any other order deemed just to terminate .
Crucially, it does not mandate prior subdivision. The provision states that courts may act on an application by co-owners regardless of subdivision.
As one judgment notes: Under s 145 of the NLC, the Court is empowered with a discretion to order the of any land owned under a or to make any order that the Court thinks just for the purpose of enabling the to be terminated.
This flexibility allows courts to facilitate sales, buyouts, or other resolutions without altering the land's physical layout.
Malaysian courts have consistently upheld this approach in multiple cases, emphasizing judicial discretion based on circumstances and co-owners' intentions.
, the court acknowledged that the order to terminate coproprietorship was made without subdivision being ordered, highlighting the court's broad powers under Section 145.
- 2025 MarsdenLR 169
allowed termination without subdivision, stating it was justified by the parties' intention to sell and prevailing circumstances.- 2025 MarsdenLR 1530
explicitly held that termination can be pursued without prior subdivision, and the majority view of co-owners does not block it. Echoing this, the view(s) of the majority holder(s) of the is not the determinant factor for the to remain or be terminated.confirmed dissolution based on proper evidence, without needing subdivision.
These rulings establish that termination is a distinct remedy, independent of subdivision proceedings. Courts prioritize resolving disputes and enabling sales over rigid land division.
Further support comes from cases like , where the percentage of shares held by each co-proprietor was deemed irrelevant: In considering whether a should be terminated, the percentage of the held by each of the co-proprietor is not a pertinent consideration.
Even (a form of subdivision) under related provisions, like , doesn't require all co-owners' consent if ordered by a court.
While termination without subdivision is generally permissible, exceptions and limitations apply:- Evidence Requirements: Applications must include full disclosure and strong evidence of intentions or disputes. Lack of credible evidence can lead to denial.
- Contractual Agreements: If co-owners have agreements restricting subdivision or outlining procedures, courts will consider them.
- Land Status: Factors like the land's size, location, or regulatory approvals may influence outcomes, though no statute mandates subdivision first.- Alternatives: Courts may order if just, but this is discretionary, not compulsory for termination.
If you're seeking to terminate :1. Gather Evidence: Document disputes, sale intentions, or other justifications.2. File an Application: Approach the court via under Section 145.3. Consider Alternatives: Explore buyouts or sales before court action.4. Seek Mediation: Though not required, it can resolve issues amicably.5. Review Agreements: Check for any binding contracts among co-owners.
Legal advice is essential, as courts exercise discretion based on specific facts.
- 2025 MarsdenLR 169
- 2025 MarsdenLR 1530
In summary, Malaysian law offers flexible remedies for co-owners, prioritizing practical solutions over mandatory subdivision. For personalized guidance, consult a land law specialist.
: Court power under Section 145 without subdivision.
- 2025 MarsdenLR 169
: Termination based on sale intentions.- 2025 MarsdenLR 1530
: No need for prior subdivision.: Evidence-based dissolution.
: Majority views irrelevant.
: Discretionary orders under s145.
Nevertheless the High Court acceded to the plaintiffs 'application and terminated the co-proprietorship without any further order as to subdivision. As said neither party filed an appeal against the said decision. ... It was further argued that no consent was obtained from the defendants when the proposed subdivision was drawn up. Decision [9] It is not disputed that the order dated 10 October 2018 the coproprietorship was terminated without any subdivision#....
of enabling the co-proprietorship to be terminated. ... to be terminated. ... of one title only; and (ii) that there shall be no subdivision of the said land the purchaser is purchasing and the purchaser undertakes not to raise any issue about subdivision and or separate title for the said land purchased. ... [15] Subsection 145(1) confers on this Court discretion whether to allow or not to allow the application for partition seeking a co-proprietorship#HL_....
for the purpose of enabling the co-proprietorship to be terminated. ... for the subdivision of the land. ... [41] The Court is vested with the power to cause the co-proprietorship to be terminated and the alienated land be partitioned or sub divided when the co-proprietors refused to give consent pursuant to s 145 National Land Code. ... In my view, too, a co-proprietor having the majority share in a piece of land thus is not barr....
the co-proprietorship in the land to be terminated". ... of the co-proprietors" may apply for the co-proprietorship in the land to be terminated. ... The Plaintiff is entitled to apply for termination of the co-proprietorship under s 145(1) of the NLC, which provides that"any of the co-proprietors may apply for the co-proprietorship in the land to be terminated". ... any of the co-proprietors, make such order as it....
[26] In considering whether a co-proprietorship should be terminated, the percentage of the undivided shares held by each of the co-proprietor is not a pertinent consideration. ... Hence, the view(s) of the majority holder(s) of the undivided shares is not the determinant factor for the co-proprietorship to remain or be terminated. [27] Section 145 of the , subject to and in accordance with the provisions of any law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure, may, on the application of any of the co-propr....
Hence, the view(s) of the majority holder(s) of the undivided shares is not the determinant factor for the co-proprietorship to remain or be terminated. ... [26] In considering whether a co-proprietorship should be terminated, the percentage of the undivided shares held by each of the co-proprietor is not a pertinent consideration. ... The other point raised by the First, Second and Third Defendants is that the Plaintiff has filed the present Originating Summons application with "the intention to coerce and/or threaten ....
Hence, the view(s) of the majority holder(s) of the undivided shares is not the determinant factor for the co-proprietorship to remain or be terminated. ... [26] In considering whether a co-proprietorship should be terminated, the percentage of the undivided shares held by each of the co-proprietor is not a pertinent consideration. ... The other point raised by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants is that the Plaintiff has filed the present Originating Summons application with "the intention to coerce and/or threaten his sib....
"Under s 145 of the NLC, the Court is empowered with a discretion to order the partition of any land owned under a co-proprietorship or to make any order that the Court thinks just for the purpose of enabling the co-proprietorship to be terminated. ... [15] In such application, the Court has the discretion to order the partition of the land or to make any order that the Court thinks just to enable the co-proprietorship to be terminated, including to order for....
without providing any credible evidence to support their contention. ... terminated and the land partitioned under sub-s(2) of s 145 on the general ground that a co-proprietor will not join in nor consent to the making of an application for partition....". ... The 1st Defendant, being the 2nd Defendant's mother, shall give right of way to the 2nd Defendant upon subdivision as the subdivision was done in accordance with the parties' respective collective shares in the Land. ... way" as ....
Partition is the subdivision of land held by co-proprietors so that they each can hold the land proportionate to their original shareholding. ... She sues her brother and nephew for vacant possession of that portion of the land which she claims is hers and which the defendants have been occupying without her consent. ... The starting point of reference is ss 342 and 343 of the NLC which states: Meaning of co-proprietorship, and when it arises "342. (1) In this Act, "co-propri....
4. As per the claim of Kerala Water Authority, a certain portion of land in old Sy. Nos. 184, 185, 187, 192 are acquired during 1929 by the Kerala Water Authority. Hence the subdivision numbers of the land possessed by the petitioners cannot be ascertained with respect of old survey subdivision. The sketch was requested from Superintendent, Central Archieves who informed that the same is not available. Request was also given to Kerala Water Authority to produce land acquisition records.
It is not in dispute that the Fast Track Court ad-hoc Additional District Judges have no right to hold the post. From Rule 4, it will be clear that the appointment is purely on ad-hoc and urgent temporary basis and is made initially for a period of two years and is liable to be terminated at any time without any notice, as quoted hereunder :- 4. The appointment made under these Rules shall be purely on ad hoc and urgent temporary basis and such appointments shall be initially for a period of two years and shall be liable to be terminated at any time without any notice. Their servic....
In exercising the power given by letter no.5094 dated 04.07.1987 and letter no.3430 dated 14.12.1977 of Deputy Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Cooperative, the adhoc appointments of the following persons on the class IV posts in the scale Rs.775-12-955-14-1025 are made. Health certificate from Civil Surgeon will have to be produced at the time of joining. Their services can be terminated without any prior notice.
Now coming to the question that if sub letting was a ground for terminating the tenancy, the authorities under the Act of 1971 were required to consider the grounds taken in the notice under Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act terminating the tenancy for declaring the opposite parties to be unauthorised occupants, it was held in Jiwan Das v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, that Section 106 of Transfer of Property Act does not contemplate giving of any reasons for terminating the tenancy. If reasonable and justifiable ground for initiating action for terminating the tenancy under Sec....
Section 106 of T.P. Act and section 2 (g) of the Act of 1971 would become ultra vires. Now coming to the question that if sub letting was a ground for terminating the tenancy, the authorities under the Act of 1971 were required to consider the grounds taken in the notice under section 106 of Transfer of Properties Act terminating the tenancy for declaring the opposite parties to be unauthorised occupants, it was held in Jiwan Das v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, that section 106 of Transfer of Properties Act does not contemplate giving of any reasons for terminating the tenancy. #HL_S....
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
