Malaysia Case Law Case Study

783 Words4 Pages
2.0 Malaysia Case Law
2.1
The extent of undue influence can be further discussed using the case of Jagindar Singh v Tara Tajaratnam on 20 November 1986.

Tara Tajaratnam , the respondent was a lady who owned a five acre land in Johor Bahru . The respondent’s brother in law---Devan had an overdraft facility, Supiah --the second appellant told the respondent that her property was required as security for her brother in law’s overdraft. Observation from the evidence, Jagindar--- the first appellant a lawyer was also a guarantor for the loan is interested in the property that the respondent owns. And on March 30, 1974 the first and second appellant Sivanathan, came to the respondent house and ask her to sign various document including a transfer
…show more content…
Clearly Devan was under their undue influence prior as he dealt with them from the start. (Scribd, 2017) When they visited the respondent’s house not a word was said about Jagindar being the attester of the transfer. We were only told that Jagindar and Sivanathan were only accompanying the second appellant there. The relationship between Jagindar and Sivanathan is advocates and solicitor. By looking at the evidence , we can conclude that Jagindar was interested in the property at an early stage. Jagindar became the true owner when he asked the second appellant to transmit the property to the third appellant who then transmit it to a development company that was owned by the first…show more content…
The agreement stated that the sales representatives were independent contractors instead of employees and this agreement took over all the earlier agreements between them. However, on 14 December 2009, the first plaintiff wished to make the agreements that he had sign invalid due to the agreements were signed under undue influence from Chew – the Chief Executive Officer in defendant’s

More about Malaysia Case Law Case Study

Open Document