MA JOSEPH CAPITAL SDN BHD v 1. ) PANNIRSELVAM A/L MANNAR 2. ) UZINANI BINTI MOHD SANI (kedua-duanya beramal sebagai Tetuan Nurliny, Pannir Mannar & Co, Peguambela & Peguamcara) 3. ) EI KIAN SEONG

b-02ncvcw-994-06-2024 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 20 August 2025 • B-02(NCvC)(W)-994-06/2024 • 47 min read

13 cases cited (0 SG, 13 foreign)

Catchwords

Whether sale and purchase of land transactions were sham transactions- Whether illegal moneylending transactions were disguised as genuine sale and purchase transactions - Whether it is appropriate for the court to scrutinise the documents and transactions when there is an allegation of illegal money lending activities - Whether the doctrine of in pari delicto and ex turpi causa non oritur action applicable-Whether the trail court was plainly wrong

Practice Areas

Whether sale and purchase of land transactions were sham transactions- Whether illegal moneylending transactions were disguised as genuine sale and purchase transactions

Judges (3)

Ahmad Fairuz bin Zainol Abidin Delivered Faizah binti Jamaludin Coram Mohd Nazlan bin Mohd Ghazali Coram

Counsel (10)

Ranjit Ooi & Robert Low Firm Rastam Singa & Co. Firm T.S. Hariharan & Partners Firm Ahmad Shahrizal Bin Abdul Aziz Counsel Respondent Chong Lip Yi Counsel Respondent Dato' Harihanan Tara Singh Counsel Appellant Mohd Faiz Bin Abd Rahim Counsel Respondent Nathaniel Low Counsel Respondent R. Thayalan Counsel Respondent Tan Eng Seng Counsel Appellant

Parties (4)

MA JOSEPH CAPITAL Sdn Bhd Appellant Ei Kian Seong Respondent Pannirselvam a/l Mannar Respondent Uzinani binti Mohd Sani Respondent

Case Significance

MA JOSEPH CAPITAL SDN BHD v 1. ) PANNIRSELVAM A/L MANNAR 2. ) UZINANI BINTI M... is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated August 20, 2025 (citation: b-02ncvcw-994-06-2024). <p>MA Joseph Capital and its related company sued solicitors and others in three related appeals, alleging that land sale and purchase transactions were shams disguising illegal moneylending activities. The Court of Appeal found overwhelming evidence of suspicious circumstances including identical pricing patterns, immediate repurchase options, and solicitors facilitating the scheme, and allowed all three appeals, setting aside the High Court's decision. The issue of damages was remitted to the The panel comprised Ahmad Fairuz bin Zainol Abidin, Faizah binti Jamaludin and Mohd Nazlan bin Mohd Ghazali, with Ahmad Fairuz bin Zainol Abidin delivering the judgment.

Summary

MA Joseph Capital and its related company sued solicitors and others in three related appeals, alleging that land sale and purchase transactions were shams disguising illegal moneylending activities. The Court of Appeal found overwhelming evidence of suspicious circumstances including identical pricing patterns, immediate repurchase options, and solicitors facilitating the scheme, and allowed all three appeals, setting aside the High Court's decision. The issue of damages was remitted to the High Court.

What was the outcome of MA JOSEPH CAPITAL SDN BHD v 1. ) PANNIRSELVAM A/L MANNAR 2. ) UZINANI BINTI M...?

<p>MA Joseph Capital and its related company sued solicitors and others in three related appeals, alleging that land sale and purchase transactions we...

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)

Moneylenders Act 1951

s 15

Cases Cited (13)

UK (1)

[1947] AC 484

MY (12)

[1950] 1 MLJ 255 [1985] 2 MLJ 291 [1997] 3 MLJ 693 [2004] 4 CLJ 309 [2004] 6 AMR 781 [2010] 9 CLJ 785 [2020] 6 MLJ 333 [2020] 6 MLJ 755 [2020] MLJU 1469 [2021] 2 MLJ 6 [2022] 5 MLJ 584 [2023] 6 MLJ 818