Naziman & Co
Contact Information
About Naziman & Co
Naziman & Co appears in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2024–2025). These were heard before MYHC (3).
On the court record
A land-law practice engaging the co-ownership, caveat and trust provisions of the National Land Code and the Evidence Act burden of proof, with related defamation work, before the High Court.
Naziman & Co is recorded in the corpus principally in land law, with an adjacent defamation matter, all before the High Court. In one matter the firm acted for the applicant seeking to terminate co-ownership of land under section 145 of the National Land Code, where a registered proprietor put forward a proposed plan of partition and a co-owner objected with an alternative plan; the court confirmed its jurisdiction under section 136 to hear and allow such an application and held that the absence of expert valuation evidence was not fatal. A second matter concerned proof of trust and title: the firm acted for the plaintiffs in a dispute engaging sections 101 and 102 of the Evidence Act 1950 on the burden of proof, the principle that a plaintiff must prove its case on the balance of probabilities and that the legal burden never shifts, the operation of the Torrens system, the validity of a cancellation of trust, and the effect of a kaveat persendirian (private caveat) under section 322 of the National Land Code, against a background of an alleged hibah kasih sayang (a gift made out of love and affection). The firm's defamation work is represented by a matter in which it acted for the defendant and in which the court dismissed the plaintiffs' entire claim with costs, finding that the plaintiffs had failed to call the relevant authority as a witness and had held back a material fact. Across these matters the firm is recorded working closely with the burden-of-proof rules that decide land and reputation disputes alike, and with the caveat, trust and co-ownership provisions of the National Land Code that recur throughout Malaysian property litigation. In the defamation matter the court dismissed the plaintiffs' claim with costs of RM5,000 subject to the allocatur, finding that they had held back a material fact and had failed to call the relevant authority as a witness.
How many cases has Naziman & Co been involved in?
Naziman & Co appears in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2024–2025).
Which courts does Naziman & Co appear in?
Naziman & Co appears before MYHC (3).
What is the focus of Naziman & Co's recorded work?
Land law, with an adjacent defamation matter, all before the High Court: termination of co-ownership under section 145 of the National Land Code, a trust-and-title dispute engaging the Evidence Act burden of proof, the Torrens system and a private caveat under section 322, and a defamation action for the defence.
How did the co-ownership matter address the absence of valuation evidence?
The court confirmed its jurisdiction under section 136 of the National Land Code to hear and allow the application to terminate co-ownership and held that the absence of expert valuer evidence was not fatal to the application.