Reported by Emjay Communications
(Isstories Editorial):- Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Dec 3, 2025 (Issuewire.com) – A small group of parcel owners numbering about 10 have taken up 8 legal battles against a property developer and its Joint Management Body (JMB) in a most bizarre orchestrated manner. The cases are marked by judicial peculiarities and decisions that appear to contradict the basic tenets of due process and established facts. Although the outcome and decisions of the eight cases in both the Tribunal and Judicial courts had exposed numerous unexplainable, stark anomalies, the developer maintains his confidence in the Malaysian legal system and in the overriding justice of God the Almighty, which would be ultimately established.
More on Isstories:
- MinerCompare Introduces New Feature Suite to Improve Transparency and Decision-
- xinzirain at Canton Fair: Meet the Custom Bag Manufacturer for Global Brands
- Your Guide to Shoes – Bags EXPO 2025: Discover Professional Women’s Shoes Manufacturer Expertise
- From Waste to Wealth: Nanda Pioneers a Sustainable Future as a China Top Food Waste Solution Provider
- Setting the Benchmark: The Latest Achievements from a China Top AC DC bidirectional converter Manufacturer
The entire course of the numerous litigations, initiated by just a handful of unit owners, has been described by an independent observer to be a case of merciless and relentless persecution against one of the most honourable developers, if not the most honourable, in the industry. This does expose that there must be a hidden agenda behind this! It is incomprehensible that a group of seemingly ordinary people would go to this extent to address non-significant issues and even issues that had been conducted for their benefit.
It is just incomprehensible that they could file their case alleging “suspected wrongdoings” in the activities and accounts of the JMB. It is a ludicrous accusation. The principle of law and fairness dictates that any accusation must be specified and credibly affirmed to be a wrongdoing before it can be entertained as effective. In this instance, the Plaintiffs failed to produce even a single creditable, or even doubtful, instance of concrete wrongdoing.
Such open-ended, non-specific accusations are meaningless, yet it is simply bizarre that the lawyer that represents them could have allowed them to state so. The case and others like it, if allowed to continue, would result in a profound and unnecessary waste of the Court’s, the Defendants’, and the community’s time and resources. The developer firmly believes that the higher courts will recognise the fundamental flaw in allowing litigation to proceed on unprincipled accusations and on mere suspicion rather than on sensible and rational complaints and on established facts.
Despite their bizarre and outrageous untenable accusations, they have obtained their pleas, even though overtly flawed. In one recent case, the plaintiffs had tabled twenty-two specific claims, yet the final ruling granted them one more, an addition that appeared entirely out of the blue. Paragraph 95 of the Grounds of Judgment declared, “The Court finds that the 1st Defendant (JMB) has acted unlawfully by calculating maintenance charges based on varied square footage/meters and imposing different maintenance rates for different parcels.”
This critical item was not claimed nor deliberated, yet surfaced to be declared “unlawful” from nowhere. The Appeal Court will be pressed to correct.
Another profound peculiarity is the rejection of the application by a substantial group of 274 parcel owners representing more than half of the parcel owners who applied on 6 February 2021 to be joined as interveners. That they were penalised with costs of RM 5,000 for attempting to intervene defies common sense, especially now, when they now have to bear the brunt of the misfortunes stemming from a case they opposed.
This decision, effectively silencing the collective will of the overwhelming majority in favour of the minority litigants, must be addressed on appeal.
The inherent contradiction at the core of the Plaintiffs’ approach was further exposed when their own lawyers petitioned the judge to declare that the JMB had not committed any wrong and should not be made to pay the costs of RM 100,000 awarded to the Plaintiffs. This raises the fundamental question: How did the case even start if the JMB was not at fault? It had no legal leg to stand on.
In a truly overwhelming and confounding twist, the Plaintiffs had successfully persuaded the judge that the JMB was faultless, yet all other defendants had to bear the full brunt of their unfounded accusations.
To add significant salt to the injury, the Plaintiffs’ petition for a drastic intervention–namely, the freezing of accounts, the appointment of an administrator, and the ordering of a forensic audit–was granted. The decision to grant such severe measures when not an iota of concrete wrongdoing had been established, and, indeed, despite the majority of claims being overwhelmingly refuted by documentation and majority vote, is baffling and disproportionate.
Naturally, the Defendants had no choice but to stay the order and immediately file for an appeal. In a further display of what many perceive as a lack of conscience, one of the Plaintiff-deponents submitted a lengthy affidavit objecting to the stay, claiming that the Defendants’ necessary actions had caused the Plaintiffs “hardship, confusion, prejudice, misery, and harm.” This assertion exposes the ethics and unconscionable characteristics of the Plaintiffs, who have taken up more than eight separate cases against the Defendants, yet claim that they are the ones bearing hardship and misery!
The legal process is currently moving towards the Appeal Court, where the defendants have full faith that the dependable Malaysian legal system and its just judges will overturn all that is erroneous in the case. Following an in-depth review of the cases, the independent observer has affirmed that the developer, treated mercilessly in this instance, stands tall and is confident that trust will be fully restored. This developer has demonstrated itself to be most honourable–a fact reaffirmed over two decades of industry experience.
Mr. Peter Chan’s prophetic words resonate with renewed force: “Justice will be revealed and prevail. The villains and minions will grind their teeth and fade away!” The pursuit of this vindication at the Appeal Court is an essential step towards preserving the honour, integrity, and operational legitimacy of the developer, the entire JMB community, and indeed, most importantly, of the nation!
This article was originally published by IssueWire. Read the original article here.
