1. ) Norrisah Binti Abu Bakar 2. ) MANSOR BIN ABU BAKAR 3. ) ZAHARAH BINTI ABDULLAH @ WOON SEE MOI 4. ) ZALIHA BINTI ABU BAKAR 5. ) HAMIDAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 6. ) NORIAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 7. ) ROGIAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 8. ) SANI BIN ABU BAKAR 9. ) NORHASINAH BINTI ABU BAKAR 10. ) AZIZ SHAH BIN ABU BAKAR 11. ) AMIR SHAH BIN ABU BAKAR v 1. ) Thunder Heights Sdn. Bhd. 2. ) F.K. Capital Berhad 3. ) TAI FOOK HOY 4. ) Foong Chen Ban 5. ) Fong Chee Kang

Case Significance

1. ) Norrisah Binti Abu Bakar 2. ) MANSOR BIN ABU BAKAR 3. ) ZAHARAH BINTI AB... is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated February 2, 2026 (citation: b-02ncvcw-179-02-2024). <p>The beneficiaries of an estate alleged that a sale and purchase agreement for family land was a sham transaction masking an illegal moneylending arrangement, while the respondents contended it was a genuine commercial transaction. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's finding that the SPA was genuine and that the appellants were victims of their own lawyer and his fugitive legal clerk, who absconded with funds. The appeal was dismissed, with the court noting one appellant's appeal was i The panel comprised Amarjeet Singh a/l Serjit Singh, Lim Hock Leng and Mohamed Zaini bin Mazlan, with Lim Hock Leng delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Alex Nandaseri De Silva (counsel for appellant), Allan Ng (counsel for appellant), Cedric Nigel Miranda (counsel for respondent), Thulasi Devadas (counsel for respondent), Tirasak Chiranakorin Chua (counsel for appellant).