The Court of Appeal recently dismissed an application by a vendor couple seeking to overturn the High Court's decision ruling in favour of the respondents in a land purchase dispute.

The purchaser had agreed to buy a piece of land from the couple sometime in March 1994 with no written sale and purchase agreement; but an oral agreement was made between them.

The purchaser deposited $73,000 by cheque and it was credited to Zainab binti Haji Awang Damit @ Alizah's account in the same month, and in April that year, both parties signed a Memorandum of Transfer of the land.

Later, a series of events led to the couple's claims on the land over the purchaser's failure to make payment.

Justices John Barry Mortimer, David John Leonard and Michael Peter Burrell decided that the judge's decision was correct and dismissed the appeal by Zainab and Awang Bol Hassan bin Haji Ibrahim.

The couple filed the application in the Court of Appeal after losing their appeal in the High Court.
Their application in the High Court and Court of Appeal was in contention with the Chief Registrar's decision ruling in favour of the respondents.

The respondents, represented by lawyer Suhaimy Kasmany of Messrs Pengiran Izad & Lee, automatically became administrators to the estate of the late purchaser.

The Court ofAppeal disputed the failure to pay upon seeing a letter from the solicitors of the Islamic Bank of Brunei which refered thatthe bank had advanced money to the purchaser on mortgage of the land.

As Bol Hassan was indebted to the same bank, the Court of Appeal thought, the bank might have credited it to Zainab's account.

The Court of Appeal finds that Zainab denied this but no bank records have been furnished either to consider the situation.

"Nothing more seems to have been done to obtain payment or redress until about 2010 when the appellants (the couple) began to write letters of complaint to various government bodies.

Also we (the Court of Appeal) were told by Bol Hassan that at this time he and his wife reoccupied the land and have been in occupation ever since," the Court of Appeal opined.

"Now, they seek to establish triable issues of fraud on the basis of events 22 years ago, contrary to clear contemporary documentary evidence," said the Justices.

"The evidence advanced by the appellants (the couple) is insufficient to raise a triable issue on fraud.

At most it raises issues on the agreed price and whether the full price was paid. Failure to pay is far from establishing fraud," the Court of Appeal concluded.

The Court of Appeal confirmed the respondents as registered owners of the land, who are heirs of the purchaser, the late Yang Amat Mulia Pengiran Sura Negara Pengiran Anak Haji Muhammad Bey Muntassir bin Pengiran Indera Mahkota Pengiran Anak (Dr) Cemiluddin Al-Haj.

Source:
Ihsan PELITA BRUNEI

by BruDirect.com

If you have any stories or news that you would like to share with the global online community, please feel free to share it with us by contacting us directly at [email protected]