GANAESH RAU A/L B.A.RAMARAU v 1. ) BHASKAR A/L NADARAJAN 2. ) PERBADANAN KEMAJUAN NEGERI SELANGOR

ba-22ncvc-487-12-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 25 August 2025 • BA-22NCvC-487-12/2021

Catchwords

Plaintiff’s claim premised on fraud-Resettlement scheme for squatters embarked upon by Selangor State Government to develop Bukit Botak- D1 was offered Lot 1593-D1 then entered into a SPA with deceased to sell Lot 1593-deceased fully paid the purchase price- Lot 1593 was subsequently changed to Lot 1396-D1 entered into a SPA with PKNS (representing the Selangor State Government) to purchase Lot 1396 on which a house was to be built-D1 paid a deposit only-when deceased came to know of the SPA entered into by D1 with PKNS, he entered a caveat-Plaintiff as executor of estate of deceased sued for specific performance of the SPA entered with deceased-PKNS also sought for an order against PKNS that the Plot 1396 be sold to the Plaintiff-whether fraud proven on the facts-whether maxim nemo dat quod non habet applicable-D1 had no title/interest/right at material time in Plot 1593 as he was only given an offer- whether contract between deceased and D1 is void as against public policy as deceased was not eligible for the resettlement scheme-section 24 (e) of Contracts Act- whether D1 should be ordered to return the purchase price received from deceased.

Practice Areas

Plaintiff’s claim premised on fraud-Resettlement scheme for squatters embarked upon by Selangor State Government to develop Bukit Botak- D1 was offered Lot 1593-D1 then entered into a SPA with deceased to sell Lot 1593-deceased fully paid the purchase price- Lot 1593 was subsequently changed to Lot 1396-D1 entered into a SPA with PKNS (representing the Selangor State Government) to purchase Lot 1396 on which a house was to be built-D1 paid a deposit only-when deceased came to know of the SPA entered into by D1 with PKNS, he entered a caveat-Plaintiff as executor of estate of deceased sued for specific performance of the SPA entered with deceased-PKNS also sought for an order against PKNS that the Plot 1396 be sold to the Plaintiff-whether fraud proven on the facts-whether maxim nemo dat quod non habet applicable-D1 had no title/interest/right at material time in Plot 1593 as he was only given an offer- whether contract between deceased and D1 is void as against public policy as deceased was not eligible for the resettlement scheme-section 24 (e) of Contracts Act- whether D1 should be ordered to return the purchase price received from deceased.

Judges (1)

Alice Loke Yee Ching Delivered

Parties (3)

Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor Defendant Bhaskar a/l Nadarajan Defendant Ganaesh Rau a/l B.a.ramarau Plaintiff

Case Significance

GANAESH RAU A/L B.A.RAMARAU v 1. ) BHASKAR A/L NADARAJAN 2. ) PERBADANAN KEMA... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated August 25, 2025 (citation: ba-22ncvc-487-12-2021). The case was decided by Alice Loke Yee Ching.

What was the outcome of GANAESH RAU A/L B.A.RAMARAU v 1. ) BHASKAR A/L NADARAJAN 2. ) PERBADANAN KEMA...?

GANAESH RAU A/L B.A.RAMARAU v 1. ) BHASKAR A/L NADARAJAN 2. ) PERBADANAN KEMA... is a High Court decision dated August 25, 2025. The case was heard by Alice Loke Yee Ching. See the full judgment for details.