Bingo! Could this be it?

Lawyer Derek Fernandez has come up with a surprising finding that should strengthen the Penang state government and the residents’ hand in negotiations with the developer.

The temporary title document (Borang 11AK), registered with the registrar of land titles and issued on 27 March 2008, contains a clause “Sekatan-sekatan kepentingan“, which states:

Tanah yang diberi milik tidak boleh dipindah milik, cagar, pajak, pajakan kecil atau sebarang bentuk urusniaga.

Fernandez therefore argues that any form of business transaction is prohibited. So, the state government could just buy back the land by paying the original premium plus interest, he says. It could also issue a notice to the developer to stop any demolition work.

This report from the NST:

Law prohibits land from being developed

KUALA LUMPUR: Land law in Penang categorically prohibits the re-development of Kampung Lorong Buah Pala, a lawyer here specialising in issues involving local authorities said yesterday.

Derek Fernandez said the temporary land ownership (Borang 11AK) document for the village issued by the Timor Laut Land Office stated that the 26,683.96 sq metre plot could not be transferred or mortgaged.

Neither could the land be leased or entered into any form of business transaction, he added.

Fernandez said the state government should issue a notice to the developer, Nusmetro Ventures (P) Sdn Bhd, to stop the demolition of structures on Penang’s High Chaparral.

“The land title actually prohibits any development unless expressly approved by the state government. The developer also cannot enter into any agreement with the Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Pulau Pinang,” he told a press conference held jointly with former Petaling Jaya councillor A.Thiruvenggadam.

Fernandez said the state government could buy the land on which the century-old settlement was located by just paying the original premium with interest.

“They do not have to pay the RM150 million cost of the housing project promoted by the developer.”

He was commenting on Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s statement that the state could not acquire the land as it would need to pay RM150 million in compensation.

Related posts:

  32 Responses to “Kg Buah Pala land title prohibits development: Lawyer”

  1. If you blindly believe lawyers, you will be sucked in by them.
    They read only 1 line and issue judgmental opinions as if they were the judges.

    Whatever happens, if litigation and not negotiation is adopted, be prepared for a long long fight in the courts assuming there in no manipulation of the judicial process.

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Has anyone really consider to whom haa the land been sold? has anyone pause to think if the officer who approves/rejects land related application is indirectly part-owner of the land? so what will he do? i said “what will” not “what should” he do. whatwill you do? b4 some1 says sack him, think about the whole public sectors – can we replace all?

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. It has been reported that the state govt never issued “Stop Work” order to the developer and this was revealed by their counsel.

    So has all LGE’s tough talk to developer just a show to deceive the villagers and the public ?

    Time is running out and LGE is running away….Monday will be a Black Monday for the residents of KBP and to all right-thinking the Penangites.

    Whatever the case, the poor and highly opaque manner LGE handles this matter shows that at the core LGE just not cut out to be a Chief Minister.

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. ‘nil

    The way LGE and the synchopathic DAP supporters have behaved thru this whole sorry episode has turned me off DAP for good. And I’m not the only one.

    LGE has dragged the good name of his father down.

    Maybe he’s just not qualified or good enough.

    A jail term doesn’t make one a good leader.

    PR best find an alternative MB.

    Let’s see how these racist hypocritical DAP supporters like that one. DAP was given the golden chance to rule and failed the multiracial test. Compared to DS Nizar in Perak, LGE belongs in MCA hanging out with … developers.

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Han2:

    Could I be right in saying that you are perhaps being a tad bit too hasty in, allegedly, casting an aspersion on our charitable, political MIC-chappie, Vell Paari?

    Ever since that revealing revelation was made in Malaysiakini some time ago about how he was supposed to have been, incredulously, so charitable in financing the residential plus the expensive overseas higher education study costs of a brother of one of his ex-employees (the actress Sujatha who is now sadly, deceased from an apparent alleged paraquat-drinking induced suicide) the general impression that most reasonable folk get of this chap, from this most remarkable attribute of charitableness, is the alleged perception that this MIC-chap must be someone who must be filled to the unbelievable point of a miracle with that abundance that can only come from an overflow of the selfless milk of human kindness.

    So that charitable offer of a free RM3.2m to CM LGE to buy back KBP may in fact be entirely in keeping with that perceived theory of an alleged abundance of miraculous selflessness.

    “Imagine Power To The People” John Lennon.

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. State money is belonged to the people of Penang. LGE and his staff are elected by Penang people. He cannot go against the majority of the penang people. Squatters are not just 23 families in Malaysia, there might be many thousands. Every sen that is spent has to be accountable to all the citizen of Malaysia.

    When LGE washed his hands, he knew he has done his best.

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. I think our Lawyer Derek Fernandez is confused with the term “sekatan kepentingan”
    I totally agree with Voter July 30th, 2009 that the ” ‘urusniaga’ or transactions that is prohibited are 1. transfer 2. charge 3. lease 4. sub-lease and any transaction connected with it like sub-divisions and others. Of course the Koperasi can develop the land but it must be totally fincanced by them”. The koperasi can however apply to the state goverment for cancellation of this so-called “sekatan kepentingan”. So, it works accordingly…..

    Complain about this comment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

 Leave a Reply

Connect with Facebook

(required)

(required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>