D One Restaurant v Anuar Sadad Bin Mohamed Mustafa

ba-12b-101-09-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 25 February 2026 • BA-12B-101-09/2025 • 16 min read

2 cases cited (0 SG, 2 foreign)

Catchwords

This appeal concerns only the dismissal of the Defendant’s counterclaim by the learned Sessions Court Judge on 18 September 2025. The broader disputes regarding vacant possession and the existence of a valid tenancy are the subject of separate proceedings and are not determinative of this appeal. The central issue is whether the Defendant’s counterclaim disclosed a sustainable legal and evidential basis for the reliefs sought. After reviewing the Record of Appeal, evidence, documentary exhibits, and submissions of counsel, the Court found no error in the Sessions Court’s decision. The Defendant failed to establish a tenancy binding on the Plaintiff, provide a consistent factual foundation, prove fraud or unlawful interference, or substantiate damages with credible evidence. The counterclaim consisted largely of unsupported assertions. Accordingly, the Court held that the decision was neither plainly wrong nor against the weight of evidence, leaving no basis for appellate intervention. The appeal was dismissed with costs of RM5,000 awarded to the Respondent.

Judges (1)

Anita binti Harun Delivered

Counsel (6)

Azhar Aziz & Associates Firm Fawwaz & Co. Firm Arvind Dhanesha a/l K Bargavan Counsel Respondent Sasha Nameera binti Sabtu Counsel Appellant Siti Nurdiyana Hamim binti Abdul Halim Counsel Appellant Syamsul Azhar bin Ab. Aziz Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

D One Restaurant Appellant Anuar Sadad bin Mohamed Mustafa Respondent

Statutes Cited

Contracts Act 1950 (Cap 136)

National Land Code (Cap 828)

Cases Cited (2)

MY (2)

[2005] 2 MLJ 1 [2015] 5 MLJ 1

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-12b-101-09-2025)