Lan Ing Hock @ Lau Ing Hock v Toh Ching King (BA-22NCvC-247-06/2023)

High Court of Malaysia22 Sept 2025

The written judgment as the court issued it, with the coram, case number, and source links. Every paragraph has its own anchor.

Open official source PDF Report an issue

Content

02/10/2025 10:21:55 BA-22NCvC-247-06/2023 Kand. 133

Something wrong on this page?

Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.

Report an issue Request removal

Malaysian judgment

Case metadata

Court: High Court of Malaysia
Decision date: 22 Sept 2025
Case number: BA-22NCvC-247-06/2023
Coram: YA Puan Elaine Yap Chin Gaik
Practice area: EVIDENCE: Admissibility of documents – Onus of proof lies on one who asserts forgery and fabrication – Production of original document – Exception to hearsay under Section 32 and 73A of the Evidence Act 1950 LAND: Ownership of land – Sale of land vide oral agreement – Hearsay – Absence of direct evidence – Circumstantial evidence – No adverse possession under section 341 of the National Land Code 1965 – Allegation that the Power of Attorney represented as an instrument to transfer the land – Possession of the title extracts – Inconsistent accounts of the hearsay – Neither party proved their proprietary rights to the land CIVIL PROCEDURE: Impugned judgment – Impeachment – Jurisdiction – High Court – Whether one High Court has jurisdiction to set aside a final order of another High Court – Locus standi to set aside the impugned judgment – Proof of fraud - Derry v Peek misrepresentations
Version: Alasan Penghakiman 1
Published: 2 Oct 2025
Source ID: 93d0f2db-8f7e-41c8-894e-220d4708d35a

Catchwords

EVIDENCE: Admissibility of documents – Onus of proof lies on one who asserts forgery and fabrication – Production of original document – Exception to hearsay under Section 32 and 73A of the Evidence Act 1950 LAND: Ownership of land – Sale of land vide oral agreement – Hearsay – Absence of direct evidence – Circumstantial evidence – No adverse possession under section 341 of the National Land Code 1965 – Allegation that the Power of Attorney represented as an instrument to transfer the land – Possession of the title extracts – Inconsistent accounts of the hearsay – Neither party proved their proprietary rights to the land CIVIL PROCEDURE: Impugned judgment – Impeachment – Jurisdiction – High Court – Whether one High Court has jurisdiction to set aside a final order of another High Court – Locus standi to set aside the impugned judgment – Proof of fraud - Derry v Peek misrepresentations

Parties

LAN ING HOCK @ LAU ING HOCK - plaintiff - ejudgment_parties
TOH CHING KING - defendant - ejudgment_parties

Primary source

Compare this reader text against the official judgment source.

Open source PDF

Catchwords