FALCON UNIGREEN SDN. BHD. v 1. ) PENTADBIR TANAH DAERAH JOHOR BAHRU 2. ) Kerajaan Negeri Johor
Outcome
Mahkamah dengan ini memerintahkan: (a) Saman Pemula / Rayuan Pemohon di bawah seksyen 418 KTN adalah dengan ini ditolak dengan Kos.
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (8)
Case Significance
A section 418 National Land Code appeal against a breach-of-condition enforcement, upholding the Land Administrator's Form 7A and Form 7B notices over a workshop built contrary to a commercial multi-storey condition.
This High Court decision concerns an appeal under section 418 of the National Land Code 1965 by a landowning company against decisions of the District Land Administrator of Johor Bahru relating to an alleged breach of an express condition of title. The property, held under a Johor Bahru title, was subject to an express condition (syarat nyata) that it be used for a bangunan bertingkat bagi tujuan perdagangan (a multi-storey building for commercial purposes). The Land Administrator took the view that the condition had been breached, the land having been used for the construction of a workshop building on what was otherwise scrub or undeveloped land, contrary to the permitted use.
Acting on that view, the Land Administrator issued a notice in Form 7A under section 128 of the Code — a notice requiring the proprietor to remedy the breach of condition — allowing a period of 180 days to do so, and subsequently a notice in Form 7B under section 129. The appeal raised questions about the validity of those notices: whether the breach of the express condition was made out, whether the 180-day period allowed for remedying it was reasonable, whether the notices had been properly served, and whether their endorsement or registration against the title was regular.
The Court examined the Land Administrator's exercise of the statutory power against the requirements of sections 128 and 129 of the Code and upheld it. It held that the Form 7A notice dated 19 June 2024 and the Form 7B notice dated 17 December 2024 were maintained and confirmed as valid in law, so that the appeal against the Land Administrator's action did not succeed. The judgment is a useful illustration of the operation of the breach-of-condition machinery in the National Land Code — the Form 7A notice to remedy and the Form 7B notice that follows — and of the scope of a proprietor's section 418 appeal against a Land Administrator's enforcement of an express condition of title.
What was the alleged breach of condition?
The property was subject to an express condition that it be used for a multi-storey building for commercial purposes, and the District Land Administrator considered the condition breached because a workshop building had been constructed on otherwise undeveloped land.
How did the Court dispose of the section 418 appeal?
The Court upheld the Land Administrator's action, holding that the Form 7A notice under section 128 dated 19 June 2024 and the Form 7B notice under section 129 dated 17 December 2024 were maintained and confirmed as valid in law.
Cases Cited (7)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ja-24ncvc-1653-12-2024)