UDL3622 Land Law II Tri 2, 2021/2022

Topic 2 Indefeasibility of Titles and Interests

Tutorials 02-03

1. Explain the following:

(a) Meaning of “indefeasibility of title”;

(b) Differences between “deferred” and “immediate” indefeasibility of title;
(c) Exceptions to concept of indefeasibility; and
(d) Bona fide purchaser for value under proviso to s 340(3).

2. A is the registered proprietor of a piece of land on which stands a house. He leases the
house to B for 10 years. A then enters into an agreement to sell the house to C.
Unknown to C, A had previously entered into a sale and purchase agreement to sell
the land to D. C is now registered as owner of the land.

(a) Is C bound by the interests, if any, of B and D?

(b) Assuming that C knew of A’s agreement with D but went ahead nevertheless
with the agreement. Does D have any remedy against C?

(c) Again, on the assumption that C knew of the earlier agreement, would your
answer be different if C had induced A to sell the land to him instead of to D?

(d) Assume that A and his wife, Z are registered co-owners of the land. A forges
Z’s signature and transfers the land to C. C is now registered. Can Z set aside
C’s title?

(e) Assume that Z does not know of A’s deceit. C charges the land to Bank Anda.
C is now in default and Bank Anda plans to obtain an order to sell the land.
Has Z any remedy at this stage?

3. Read the following cases for discussion:

(a) Datuk Jaginder Singh & Ors v Tara Rajaretnam [1983] 2 MLJ 196 SC;
[1986] 1 MLJ 105 PC
(b) Loke Yew v Port Swettenham Rubber Co Ltd [1913] AC 491 PC
(c) Adorna Properties Sdn. Bhd. v Boonsom Boonyanit [2001] 1 MLJ 241 FC;
[1997] 2 MLJ 62 CA; [1995] 2 MLJ 863 HC
(d) Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San & Ors [2010] 2 MLJ 1 FC
(e) OCBC (M) Bhd. v Pendaftar Hakmilik Negeri Johor Darul Takzim [1999] 2
MLJ 511 CA
(f) Owe Then Kooi v Au Thiam Seng [1990] 1 MLJ 234

Prepared by Tay Eng Siang, Amir Nur Ikhwan Amernudin & Asfarina Kartika Binti 1
Shakri, FOL, MMU
UDL3622 Land Law II Tri 2, 2021/2022

Topic 2 Indefeasibility of Titles and Interests

CASE STUDY FOR DISCUSSION

4. Edmond (husband) and Cecilia (wife) co-own a piece of 38-acre land, Lot 007 at
Mukim Jasin, Melaka (‘the land’). Cecilia has been away from the country to
accompany their son who is pursuing his tertiary education in Australia since 2013.
She entrusted her husband to take care of their properties, including the land. She did
not empower Edmond to sell, transfer and charge the land. Edmond was keen to start
his own butterfly farm business on part of the land but he was short of funds. He
approached SuperDan Berhad (‘SBB’) for a loan and in June 2014 a third party
charge was created on the land. With the solicitors’ permission, he brought back the
loan documents including the instrument of charge in Form 16A to be executed by his
wife. In fact, he had executed it himself by forging his wife’s signature. The charge
was registered. By April 2015, Edmond was unable to make ends meet and was
unable to pay his instalment to SBB. As the loan fell into non-performing loan
category, SBB transferred the charge to Asam Ganas Bank Berhad (‘AGBB’) in June
2015. AGBB applied to the High Court for an Order for Sale after Edmond was
unable to comply with the notice of default. The order was granted in mid-October
2015 and the public auction was to be held in early January 2016. Cecilia only
discovered this whole episode after returning from Australia in January 2016.

Advise her as regards to her right to recover the land in particular her half undivided
share. Would her position be different if the land now registered in the name of the
purchaser in the public auction?
(Total: 25 marks)
[Question 2, Tri 2, 2015/2016 Final]

Reading List to include BUT not limited to the following:

o s 340(2)(b),s 340(3) & proviso, s 319(2), s 321(3)(c) NLC
o Chiew Lip Seng v Perwira Habib Bank (M) Bhd,
o OCBC Bank (M) Bhd v Pendaftar Hakmilik Negeri Johor (CA),
o EON Bank Bhd v Hotel Flamingo,
o Boonsom Boonyanit v Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd (CA & FC),
o Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San & Anors (FC),
o Mohamed bin Buyong v Pemungut Hasil Tanah, Gombak,
o Agrimal Project Sdn Bhd v Pendaftar Hakmilik, PTG, Johor,
o OCBC Bank (M) Bhd v Pendaftar Hakmilik Negeri Johor (CA),
o Pekan Nenas Industries Sdn Bhd v Chong Ching Chuen (FC),
o Ong Ban Chai v Seah Siang Mong (CA)

Please prepare the above for discussion.

Prepared by Tay Eng Siang, Amir Nur Ikhwan Amernudin & Asfarina Kartika Binti 2
Shakri, FOL, MMU