Hee cheng v krishnan

By
Nur Farhana binti Abdul Karim Nur Izzati binti Mohd Shaiful Bahri Nur Syahirah binti Mohamad Tahir LEB120075 LEB120076 LEB120077

Facts of the case

Plaintiff claimed for specific performance and alternatively, damages for breach, of a contract which was entered between plaintiff and also defendant. The defendant was the holder at that material time, of the house that was built upon a piece of land in respect of which a Temporary Licence was issued. In the contract, it was an attempt to sell and purchase of the defendants right under the TOL.

 Plaintiff contended that there was a conclude bargain by which the defendants was to sell the rights and the Plaintiff was the Purchaser in the amount of $2000. Hence, the Plaintiff had paid $200 to purchase the defendant's rights On the other hand, the defendant contended that he was prepared to sell the said right of $2500 but the Plaintiff was not prepared to meet him and therefore left the matters in the air and there was no further communication by the plaintiff to accept the offer. Defendant then, entered into a contract to sell of a same subject to another person.

ISSUE

Whether the contract entered by the parties for selling and purchase of a house built on the ground of TOL is valid. - VOID-

Temporary Occupation License

a permission granted by the State Authority to any person or body for the purpose of a specified activity on the land, without which, the person or body would be deemed an unlawful occupier (Prof. Nik Abdul Rashid, 1978)

1. s. 68- A TOL CANNOT be transferred or assigned

Paruvathy v. Krishnan (1955) Any assignment, arrangement to transfer or assign the whole or any part of the TOL land will be of no effect and such assignment/arrangement will be illegal.

Govindaraju v. Krishnan (1962) 1 MLJ 334 TOL holder is allowed to rent his house built on his TOL land

2. Illegal contract under S. 24(b) Contracts Act - It is of such a nature that if permitted, it would defeat any law

Rule 41 of Regulation 40 of the Land Rules 1930 - No license for the TOL of state land shall be transferable

- The contract is an attempt to sell and purchase the defendant's rights under temporary occupation license. - Therefore, if the contract is allowed, it would defeat the provisions of relevant laws.

Opinion
The land in question is a STATE LAND.

AGREE

So, any dealings must be done according to the provisions of the Land Code and subsidiary legislation enacted under it. Rule 41 of Land Rules 1930 clearly states that no license for the temporary occupation of State land shall be transferrable. If the court allows the contract made, the provision would be defeated.

 Section 68 NLC .a TOL shall NOT be capable of assignment

TOL confers a personal right on the holder but any transaction amounting to a transfer of any rights under the license is null and void.