1. ) EMY NURROSYDAH BINTI IBRAHIM 2. ) CHE NORSIAH BINTI HASHIM v 1. ) Pentadbir Tanah Negeri Perlis 2. ) NORIZAN BIN HASHIM

ra-22ncvc-10-12-2021 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 4 February 2025 • RA-22NCvC-10-12/2021 • 22 min read

13 cases cited (1 SG, 12 foreign)

Catchwords

Seksyen 101 Akta Keterangan 1950 - Seksyen 102 Akta Keterangan 1950 - beban dan onus pembuktian dalam kes sivil - prinsip bahawa plaintif mesti membuktikan kes atas imbangan kebarangkalian - burden of proof lies upon the person who has to prove a fact and it never shifts - kegagalan pembuktian membawa kepada penolakan tuntutan - pemakaian prinsip Torrens - kesahan pembatalan amanah - kesan kaveat persendirian di bawah seksyen 322(4) Kanun Tanah Negara - hak pemilik berdaftar mutlak untuk mendapatkan milikan kosong - seksyen 322 Kanun Tanah Negara - pemasukan instrument pembatalan amanah diterima sebelum kaveat persendirian berkuatkuasa - hibah kasih sayang - Pemegang Amanah sah dan teratur dari segi undang-undang;

Practice Areas

Seksyen 101 Akta Keterangan 1950

Judges (1)

Arik Sanusi bin Yeop Johari Delivered

Counsel (5)

Afif & Asrul Firm Naziman & Co Firm Ayu Rohaiza Binti Khazali Counsel Defendant Mohd Asrul Affendi Bin Abdul Halim Counsel Defendant Naziman Bin Mahmud Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (4)

Pentadbir Tanah Negeri Perlis Defendant Che Norsiah binti Hashim Plaintiff Emy Nurrosydah binti Ibrahim Plaintiff Norizan bin Hashim Defendant

Case Significance

1. ) EMY NURROSYDAH BINTI IBRAHIM 2. ) CHE NORSIAH BINTI HASHIM v 1. ) Pentad... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated February 4, 2025 (citation: ra-22ncvc-10-12-2021). <p>Two plaintiffs challenged the cancellation of a trust over land in Perlis, claiming the registration of the trustee as owner was unlawful under s.322 of the National Land Code. The High Court dismissed the claim and allowed the defendant's counterclaim for vacant possession, finding the cancellation of the trust was valid as it was registered before the private caveat took effect and the defendant was the absolute registered owner under the Torrens system.</p> The case was decided by Arik Sanusi bin Yeop Johari. Counsel appearing: Ayu Rohaiza Binti Khazali (counsel for defendant), Mohd Asrul Affendi Bin Abdul Halim (counsel for defendant), Naziman Bin Mahmud (counsel for plaintiff).

Summary

Two plaintiffs challenged the cancellation of a trust over land in Perlis, claiming the registration of the trustee as owner was unlawful under s.322 of the National Land Code. The High Court dismissed the claim and allowed the defendant's counterclaim for vacant possession, finding the cancellation of the trust was valid as it was registered before the private caveat took effect and the defendant was the absolute registered owner under the Torrens system.

What was the outcome of 1. ) EMY NURROSYDAH BINTI IBRAHIM 2. ) CHE NORSIAH BINTI HASHIM v 1. ) Pentad...?

<p>Two plaintiffs challenged the cancellation of a trust over land in Perlis, claiming the registration of the trustee as owner was unlawful under s.3...

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act

s 101

Cases Cited (13)

SLR (1)

[2007] 4 SLR 855

UK (1)

[1927] 1 Ch 367

MY (9)

[1976] 2 MLJ 53 [1980] 2 MLJ 86 [1993] 1 MLRH 480 [1993] 2 CLJ 523 [1998] 2 CLJ 740 [2017] 3 MLJ 281 [2017] 4 MLJ 697 [2017] 5 MLJ 398 [2019] MLJU 1432

IN (2)

AIR 1961 SC 1474 AIR 1964 SC 136