TCM MINING SDN BHD v NAAM SDN BHD

ka-24ncvc-185-06-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 12 May 2025 • KA-24NCvC-185-06/2022 • 26 min read

10 cases cited (0 SG, 10 foreign)

Catchwords

Specific Relief Act 1950 - Lease Agreement - Originating Summons – Trespass - Encroachment - Declaratory Order – Injunction - Vacant Possession – Lessee – Lessor – Affidavits - Cross-examination – Submissions – Admissions - National Land Code - Contractual Effect - Vacant Possession - Malay Reserve Land - De-classification - Malay Company - Enactment No. 63 (Malay Reservations) (Kedah) - Suppression of Material Evidence - Adverse Inference - Evidence Act 1950 - Registration of Lease - Equitable Lease - Specific Performance - Non-joinder - Rules of Court 2012 - Natural Justice - Declaratory Relief - Stamp Duty - LHDN Receipt - Balance of Probabilities - Possessory Rights - Procedural Defect

Judges (1)

John Lee Kien How @ Mohammad Johan Lee Delivered

Counsel (8)

M. Pathmanathan & Co. Firm Thomas Philip Firm M. Pathmanathan Counsel Plaintiff Mathew Thomas Philip Counsel Defendant Nandakumar S. Haridas Counsel Defendant Raqib bin Osman Counsel Defendant Shirin Pathmanathan Counsel Plaintiff The Ee Fey Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

NAAM Sdn Bhd Respondent TCM MINING Sdn Bhd Applicant

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

National Land Code (Cap 828)

Rules of Court 2012

Specific Relief Act 1950 (Cap 137)

Cases Cited (10)

UK (1)

[1969] 3 All ER 673

MY (9)

[1987] 1 CLJ 250 [1997] 4 MLJ 601 [2005] 8 CLJ 249 [2007] 8 MLJ 528 [2013] 10 MLJ 363 [2016] 12 MLJ 88 [2017] MLJU 280 [2019] 1 MLJ 1 [2022] 1 MLJ 30

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ka-24ncvc-185-06-2022)