Sime Darby Plantation (Peninsular) Sdn. Bhd. v Pentadbir Tanah Kuala Langat

Case Significance

Illustrates the limits on adducing fresh valuation evidence at a land reference under the Land Acquisition Act 1960, and the principle that a party may not use a new valuation report to reintroduce compensation claims already rejected on an earlier amendment application.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam, delivered by Shahnaz binti Sulaiman J, concerns a land reference under the Akta Pengambilan Tanah 1960 (the Land Acquisition Act 1960), one of a group of references heard together arising from the acquisition of plantation land for a 500kV electricity transmission-line project from a gas-fired power plant to a main intake substation in the Kuala Langat district. The applicant, a plantation company, was dissatisfied with the compensation determined by the Land Administrator and had brought the matter to the High Court by way of a reference under section 38(5) of the Act. The specific question the Court determined was whether the applicant could adduce a new and different Private Valuation Report — referred to as the "Iskandar Report" — at the land-reference proceedings.

The Court examined the content of the proposed new valuation report and its procedural history. It found that the report sought to introduce compensation headings — including items such as environmental-impact-assessment costs — that would significantly increase the total claim, and that these were the very heads of claim that had previously been rejected as additional grounds when the applicant sought to amend its Borang N (Form N). Allowing the new report would effectively let the applicant reintroduce previously dismissed claims without a proper application, circumventing earlier rulings of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal on the amendment of the Form N.

The Court held that the new Private Valuation Report was an attempt to circumvent those earlier decisions, and noted that the applicant had given no reason to explain the need for a fresh valuation report. It dismissed the application to file the new Private Valuation Report, with costs of RM1,000 to the Land Administrator. The judgment is a useful illustration of the limits on adducing fresh valuation evidence at a land reference under the Land Acquisition Act 1960, and of the principle that a party may not use a new valuation report to reintroduce compensation claims already rejected on an earlier amendment application.