P
Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
Organisation 9 cases
About Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur appears as a party in 9 judgments in the MY Case Law database, spanning January 2025 to October 2025. Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur appeared as respondent in 9 cases. Cases span the High Court (7), Court of Appeal (2).
How many court cases involve Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur?
Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur appears in 9 published judgments from January 2025 to October 2025. Most commonly as respondent (9 cases).
In which Malaysian courts has Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur appeared?
Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur has appeared across High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (7 cases) and Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) (2 cases), totaling 9 judgments.
Practice Areas
Land Acquisition 2 There are no valid reasons to disturb the Award by the Land Administrator for Land and Building 2 whether the written opinions of the two assessors in a Land Reference under section 40D of the Land Acquisition Act 1960-must be given to parties for counsel to submit on their contents before the High Court delivers its decision-The doctrine of cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos-land owners have the rights not only to the plot of land itself, but also the air above and the ground below-the ad coelum doctrine-14 This right of ownership over land has been restricted by section 44 of the National Land Code, which provides that the landowner shall be entitled to “the exclusive use and enjoyment of so much of the column of airspace above the surface of the land, and so much of the land below the surface, as is reasonably necessary to the lawful use and enjoyment of the land”-The Federal Constitution guarantees a person to a right to property-Article 13 of the Federal Constitution-“(1) No person shall be deprived of property save in accordance with law-(2) No law shall provide for the compulsory acquisition or use of property without adequate compensation.”-the land acquisition process and procedure in Malaysia-must be strictly adhered to-an aggrieved party has a legal right to object to the award of the land administrator by way of a land reference to the High Court provided-Land Reference Court-40D of the LAA to be ultra vires the Federal Constitution-Arahan Amalan Hakim Besar Malaya Bil. 1 Tahun 2017-whether the declaration of law-Sejati has retrospective effect or is only prospectively effective from its decision-The written opinions of the two assessors in a Land Reference under section 40D of the LAA must be made available to parties for counsel to submit on their contents before the High Court delivers decision on the Land Reference 1 Land acquisition compensation dispute. This land reference concerned the acquisition of a low-cost apartment under the Land Acquisition Act 1960. The applicant challenged the adequacy of compensation awarded. The Court upheld the Land Administrator’s award of RM241,960.00 based on the comparison method, rejecting the applicant’s speculative valuation using the residual method. The Court found that the award complied with the principle of equivalence and adequately reflected market value and reasonable ancillary claims. The decision affirms that valuation must be based on actual market evidence, not unproven redevelopment potential. 1 (a) the Respondent’s decision is ultra vires when it was wrongly decided that the setback for the Applicant’s building is not necessary; 1 (b) the Respondent failed to consider – 1 (i) that the Applicant’s building is beside the road and it is not safe for their employees, customers and visitors; 1 (ii) that the Applicant will be held responsible for failing to provide a safe place to work and safe place for business by not providing a setback for the building; 1
Respondent (9)
w-01a-468-07-2024 MYCOA
KAOCHERN CORPORATION SDN. BHD. v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
12 October 2025
w-01a-469-07-2024 MYCOA
KAOCHERN CORPORATION SDN. BHD. v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
12 October 2025
wa-15-25-05-2023 MYHC
ZAINAB BINTI ALIAS v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
15 June 2025
wa-15-1-01-2023 MYHC
MAH CHIN BOOI v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
9 April 2025
wa-15-18-08-2022 MYHC
ROZEL CORPORATION SDN. BHD v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
6 March 2025
wa-15-32-05-2023 MYHC
NORIZAN BINTI JAMALUDIN v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
25 February 2025
wa-15-36-05-2023 MYHC
RUSMAINI BINTI ABDUL TALIB v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
25 February 2025
wa-15-10-03-2022 MYHC
Roziah Binti Yusof (Waris Kepada Yusof Bin Hassan, Si Mati No. K/p: 2141621, Pemilik Petak (Benefisial)) v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
27 January 2025
wa-15-9-03-2022 MYHC
MOHAMAD SHAHMIR BIN AH SHA'ARI v Pentadbir Tanah Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur
27 January 2025