Sidek bin Haji Muhamad & Ors v Government of Perak [1982] 1 MLJ 313

LEE SHI HUI LIM JING XIAN LIM SHUK KIM

LEB 120044 LEB 120046 LEB 120047

The As come to Perak and opened up a jungle area now known as Seberang Perak in Kg Gajah. They were squatters. Subsequently, other settlers come to the area and the state government resettled some settlers to the land where the As already in occupation.

Facts

It is alleged that as a result of a meeting between the squatters and government officers, the District Officer had promise each settler 3 acres of padi land subject to successful interview. Utusan Melayu published an article stating that the State Government was prepared to open up about 10,000 acres of land to be developed by the squatters and the State Director of Lands and Mines had said that each pioneer settler would be given 5 acres of padi land.

But eventually, the As were given notice to stop work and to vacate the area. The As brought an action for a declaration that they were entitled in law and in equity to be in possession of the land they had pioneered and occupied. The respondents applied to strike out the A's action on the grounds that the As had no cause of action as they were squatters.

Issue No. 1

Whether the appellants have a cause of action against the respondents? NO, because they are squatters. S 48, no title to State land shall be acquired by possession, unlawful occupation or occupation under any licence for any period whatsoever. S 78, alienation of State land shall only be effected in accordance with the provision of Chapter 3 of Part Five and Chapter 2 of Part Eleven. The land remains State land until registration under the NLC. S 341, State Authority has the power to dispossess any squatters at any time. S 425, illegal occupation of State land is an offence.

Issue No. 2

Are the words given by the State Director of Lands and Mines in the Utusan Melayu binding against the State Government, assuming that they are true? NO, no relevant provisions under the Pertubuhan Berita Nasional Malaysia Act, 1967.
Appellants claim in estoppel was rejected by the Federal Court as the State Director of Lands and Mines did not have proper authority to bind the State Authority.

Hence

Conclusion
No adverse possession against state. Squatters have no rights in law or in equity. Title to State land shall only be acquired by the process of alienation in compliance with the relevant provisions under NLC. Where an Act creates an obligation, and empowers the obligation in a specified manner, we take it as a general rule that performance cannot be enforced in any other manner.

THANK YOU! THE END