[2023] 6 MLRA 14
Federal Court, Putrajaya
Nallini Pathmanathan, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJJ
[Civil Appeal Nos: 01(f)-8-03-2020(B), 01(f)-19-05-2022(B) & 01(f)-20-05-2022(B)]
Nallini Pathmanathan, Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJJ


Mary Lim Thiam Suan FCJ:

[1] There are three appeals before us, two by Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia [LLM] and the third by MMC Tepat Teknik Sdn Bhd [MMC Tepat Teknik]. All three appeals arise out of the compulsory acquisition of lands belonging to MMC Tepat Teknik under the Land Acquisition Act 1960 [Act 486]. After full consideration of the issues, we unanimously allowed the appeals by LLM and dismissed the appeal by MMC Tepat Teknik.

The Compulsory Acquisition

[2] MMC Tepat Teknik [name changed with effect 10 October 2014 from Tepat Teknik Sdn Bhd], owned three adjacent and contiguous pieces of property, namely Lots 1604, 1605 and 1608 in the District of Klang, Selangor. MMC Tepat Teknik is in the business of manufacturing large steel fabricated equipment and parts for use in various industries. For this purpose, it located its heavy steel fabrication plant on the subject lots. The plant comprising 3 buildings, 1 office block, a store and a guardhouse, has been there for some 25- odd years before the subject lots were compulsorily acquired.

[3] On 8 October 2015, a s 8 notice under Act 486 was gazetted, formally declaring that part of Lot 1604 and the entire of Lots 1605 and 1608 would be acquired for the construction of the West Coast Expressway (Taiping - Banting) Package 3. This expressway was under the charge of LLM.

[4] On 13 June 2016, the Land Administrator made an award of compensation in the total sum of RM59,282,800.90 to MMC Tepat Teknik who had itemised their claims under five separate heads:

i. value of land;

ii. value of buildings including a distinct claim for consultancy fee for new construction;

iii. business disruption comprising claims for losses from existing contracts and contracts under negotiation, and

iv. overhead expenses; staff costs and, moving costs.

[5] Save for staff costs and losses from contracts under negotiations, MMC Tepat Teknik's other claims were recognised and awarded compensation by the Land Administrator.

Sign up to view full cases Login