WEST COAST EXPRESSWAY SDN BHD v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang PENCELAH 1. ) Kuna Selan A/l Ramasamy [Sebagai Wasi Harta Pusaka Kepada Amirtham A/p Apathurai (No. K/p:- 480611-10-5676)] 2. ) Lim Aik Say 3. ) Vasantha A/p Muthusamy 4. ) Lim Aik Soon 5. ) Rukumani A/p Perumal 6. ) Tan Boon Khee

Case Significance

Illustrates how the classification of acquired land under subsection 115(4) of the National Land Code feeds into the assessment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act 1960, where a concessionaire and landowners contest the Land Administrator's award from opposite directions on consolidated references.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam concerns consolidated land reference proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960) arising from the acquisition of land at Lot 9896, Mukim Klang, in connection with an expressway project. After the Land Administrator (Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Klang) had made an award of compensation, the matter was referred to the court, and several references concerning the same land were consolidated and heard together. As in similar references, the concessionaire and the landowners approached the Land Administrator's award from opposite directions: the concessionaire, West Coast Expressway Sdn Bhd, sought to reduce the award as excessive, while the landowners, who included the executor of a deceased proprietor's estate and other registered proprietors, sought to increase it. A distinctive feature of this reference was a dispute over the correct classification of the land, and in particular the application of subsection 115(4) of the National Land Code 1965, which bears on the treatment of land classified for agricultural use. The classification matters because the market value of the acquired land, which the court must assess as at the date of the acquisition notification, turns in part on the use to which the land may lawfully be put, and a party contending for an agricultural classification will ordinarily argue for a lower value than one contending for development potential. Weighing the competing valuation evidence of the parties' valuers against the matters prescribed for the assessment of compensation under the Act, including market value, and any severance and injurious affection, the court determined the compensation properly payable on the consolidated references, adjusting the Land Administrator's award in light of its findings on classification and value while disallowing the other heads of claim that were not made out. The judgment is a useful illustration of how the classification of acquired land under subsection 115(4) of the National Land Code feeds into the assessment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act 1960.