Unknown Story
Storyboard Text
- I wanted to mention that, under the Malaysia National Land Code also provides the situation that constitutes the act of registration where it is "the making of a prescribed memorial of the dealing in the register document of title under the hand and seal of the registering authority." Thus, there would be no registration if the memorial is made without the registering authority signing and sealing it.
- I also refer to section 217(2) of the NLC where based on this section, the undivided share of any land transferred can be vested upon the transferee only upon the registration of the transfer. Thus, I would say that the appellant in this case cannot rely upon section 340 of the NLC because it can be clearly seen based on the facts that there was no registration upon the land.
- Regarding the issue on whether the Collector was correct in law in cancelling or deleting the entry made in the register. I can say that section 380 of the NLC mentioned regarding the power of the Collector or Registrar which is to correct errors contained in the documents of title and this section did not mention any of the cancellation or deletion matters.
- But, the word “cancellation” and “deletion” is actually can be found in section 382 (1) which stated that:"On making any correction, deletion or cancellation pursuant to section 380 or 381, the Registrar shall endorse on the instrument in question a note under his hand and seal of the reason therefore and the date on which it was effected.”
Vytvořeno více než 30 milionů Storyboardů