JUDGMENT

Introduction

[1] The dispute in this case is among family members over a piece of land. The High Court decided that the land was lawfully transferred from the appellant to the 1st respondent and thereafter to the 2nd respondent. The appellant appealed against that decision of the High Court.

[2] Among others, the dispute involves an allegation that the instruments used to transfer the land are tainted with fraud and the appellant as the owner of the land had not at any point in time agreed to this transfer of the land.

Background Facts

[3] The appellant is the nephew of the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent is the sister of the appellant. The 3rd respondent is an advocate and solicitor cum commissioner of oaths.

[4] The disputed land was at all material times, registered under the name of the appellant who got the land from his grandmother, Sinnakah a/p Bommaneikkan ("Sinnakah"). The appellant contended the land was then transferred to the 1st respondent (Sinnakah's daughter) without his knowledge. Having been registered as the owner, the 1st respondent transferred the land to the 2nd respondent after the latter claimed to have bought the same from the former. There is a Power of Attorney ("PA"), attested by the 3rd respondent, which is heavily disputed by the appellant. It is alleged this PA was signed by the appellant in the presence of the 3rd respondent. The appellant alleged that his signature on the PA was forged. This PA purportedly transferred the land from the appellant to t