Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for LEE KOK CHIAN vs CHEOK LAM CHUAN & ANOTHER APPEAL...
LEE KOK CHIAN vs CHEOK LAM CHUAN & ANOTHER APPEAL - 2025 MarsdenLR 2205
: Subsequent purchasers cannot claim indefeasibility of title without proving bona fide purchase and conducting proper due diligence in cases involving fraudulent transfers. The court held that D5 and D6 failed to establish they were bona fide purchasers for value due to suspiciously short time frames between transfers, lack of proof of payment, and failure to conduct due diligence, thereby negating their claims of good faith and rendering their titles defeasible by reason of fraud.Checking relevance for SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR...SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR - 2024 MarsdenLR 35
: Under the National Land Code, the indefeasibility of land title is not absolute and is subject to fraud. Registration confers ownership but does not guarantee indefeasibility if the title is tainted by fraud. The burden of proof lies on the purchaser to establish good faith and valuable consideration, and failure to do so—particularly in the presence of suspicious circumstances—renders the title defeasible. The court emphasized that a purchaser must conduct due diligence, and the failure to prove bona fide purchase for value results in the loss of indefeasibility, even if the title is registered.Checking relevance for TAN SUEE CHIEH vs PREMFIELD DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & ORS...TAN SUEE CHIEH vs PREMFIELD DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD & ORS - 2022 MarsdenLR 341
: Under Section 340 of the National Land Code, land titles are indefeasible unless tainted by fraud or misrepresentation. The court held that a purchaser''''s title obtained through fraud—such as forgery or lack of bona fide purchase—can be invalidated, even if the title was registered. This confirms that good faith is a critical factor in maintaining indefeasibility: a title cannot be indefeasible if the purchaser acted in bad faith or failed to exercise due diligence. The court emphasized that the principle of indefeasibility does not protect fraudulent or dishonest transactions, reinforcing that good faith is a prerequisite for the protection of land titles under the law.Checking relevance for SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR...SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR - 2024 MarsdenLR 3442
: Under Section 340(3) of the National Land Code, indefeasibility of title is not automatically conferred by registration. It is only acquired upon proof that the land was purchased in good faith and for valuable consideration. The distinction between ownership (which arises from registration under Section 89) and indefeasibility of title is crucial: ownership refers to legal title, while indefeasibility is a shield against adverse claims, and it is not established by mere registration. The court emphasized that the register is not conclusive evidence of indefeasibility, and that good faith and valuable consideration must be proven to establish indefeasibility, dispelling the misconception that registration alone vests indefeasibility.Checking relevance for SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR...SETIAKON ENGINEERING SDN BHD vs MAK YAN TAI & ANOR - 2024 MarsdenLR 3442
: Under Section 340(3) of the National Land Code, indefeasibility of title is not automatically conferred by registration alone. Instead, it is acquired only upon proof that the land was purchased in good faith and for valuable consideration. The court emphasizes that good faith and valuable consideration are essential prerequisites for indefeasibility, and that the register does not provide ''''conclusive evidence'''' of indefeasibility. The distinction between ownership (legal title) and indefeasibility (immunity from attack) is crucial: ownership is established under Section 89, but indefeasibility under Section 340(3) requires independent proof of good faith and valuable consideration. Furthermore, the setting aside of a judgment in default does not retroactively invalidate titles acquired by third parties who acted in good faith and for valuable consideration, unless fraud or forgery is proven. Thus, good faith is a fundamental condition for achieving indefeasibility of title.
