Court of Appeal upholds Terengganu state’s forfeiture of leased land

2026-02-04 - 08:26

The Court of Appeal bench upheld the High Court’s findings that the forfeiture procedure adopted by the state authority was proper and in accordance with the law. PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has ruled that the Terengganu state authority was justified in forfeiting a plot of land leased to an engineering company for 60 years, despite receiving partial payment of quit rent. In dismissing an appeal by Eni Engineering Sdn Bhd, the three-member panel upheld the High Court’s findings that the forfeiture procedure adopted by the state authority was proper and in accordance with the law. “The respondents (the state authorities) complied with the mandatory requirements for forfeiture,” Justice Evrol Marriette Peters said when delivering the court’s unanimous decision. She said the High Court’s analysis of the case was thorough and correct. Peters also noted that the company still owed land tax and other charges, totalling RM1,610. The panel also upheld the High Court’s ruling that the company’s legal challenge had been filed out of time. Peters said the three-month limitation period under Section 418 of the National Land Code (NLC) began on Sept 13, 2023, when Eni Engineering first became aware of the forfeiture. “The originating summons was filed on March 15, 2024, well beyond the statutory period,” she said in broad grounds delivered after hearing the appeal together with Justice Wong Kian Kheong, the bench chairman, and Justice Radzi Abdul Hamid. Eni Engineering was also ordered to pay RM10,000 in costs to the Kemaman district land administrator and the Terengganu director of land and mines, both named respondents in the appeal. On Nov 28, 2021, the district land administrator issued a notice under the NLC demanding payment of land tax arrears, but Eni Engineering failed to comply. Eleven months later, on Oct 25, 2022, the land administrator issued both a forfeiture order under Section 100 of NLC and a notice of reversion of land to the government (Form 8A) under Section 130. The company claimed it was unaware of the notices because its business office was closed and its director often travelled between Johor and Terengganu. The director claimed he only learnt of the forfeiture on Sept 13, 2023, when visiting the company premises. The following day, the company paid RM8,000 towards the arrears of RM9,610. Eni Engineering subsequently requested that the land administrator withdraw the forfeiture, but this was rejected. Its appeal to the Terengganu state authority was rejected by the director of land and mines on Dec 20, 2023. It then filed an originating summons in the High Court, which was dismissed, giving rise to the present appeal. Lawyers M Ramachelvam, Nurul Syuhada Abdullah and Ameerul Radzi Razlan represented the company, while Nawawi Ismail and Zulfazliah Mahmud acted for the respondents.