"Let everybody settle in the hearing together with the Felda suit. I think the Malaysian public deserve to know what is happening.”
PUTRAJAYA (Oct 3): The Court of Appeal (COA) on Tuesday unanimously allowed an appeal by Synergy Promenade Sdn Bhd to reinstate its suit against the Federal Land Development Authority (Felda) and Felda Investment Corporation Sdn Bhd (FIC) regarding vacant possession of the Jalan Semarak land.
At the same time, the appellate court dismissed Synergy Promenade's appeal to obtain a summary judgement against Felda and FIC.
The three-member bench led by judge Datuk Azizah Nawawi ordered that the Synergy Promenade suit be heard along with Felda’s suit against its former chairmen Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad and Tan Sri Shahril Abdul Samad, Synergy Promenade and 17 others.
“The bench allows the appeal to reinstate the suit. This follows Section 3(3)(c) of the Land Development Act (LDA) 1956 that requires the minister’s approval before entering into a joint-venture agreement.
“From the court’s documents in the Felda suit, it was pleaded [by the defendants] that a full approval was obtained from the minister. Therefore, we find there is a triable issue of fact as to whether there was an approval obtained under Section 3(3)(c) of the LDA. Added to that the issues of conspiracy, fraud, and conspiracy against the appellant (Felda), [the matter] will go for trial,” she said.
Hence, the suit is to be reinstated, Azizah said, and ordered the parties to bear their own costs.
“Let everybody settle in the hearing together with the Felda suit. I think the Malaysian public deserve to know what is happening,” she added.
It is understood that Felda's suit and the Synergy Promenade matter may be brought up before High Court judge Dr Mohd Johan Lee on Oct 16.
The other judges who heard the appeal were Datuk See Mee Chun and Mohamed Zaini Mazlan.
Section 3(3)(c) of the LDA states that Felda has to obtain the approval of the minister in charge of the authority to enter into a partnership, joint venture, undertaking, or cooperation in any manner.
High Court struck out Synergy Promenade’s suit owing to no minister’s agreement
On Nov 23, 2021, then High Court judge Datuk Azimah Omar allowed Felda and FIC’s application to strike out Synergy Promenade’s suit on the grounds that the agreement, which required Felda to deliver vacant possession of the land, was illegal and unenforceable pursuant to Section 3 of the LDA.
“The development agreement was executed in contravention of Section 3 of the LDA, as the consent of the then minister was not obtained, which rendered the development agreement illegal and unenforceable,” Azimah said.
However, during the hearing of the appeal on Tuesday, Synergy Promenade’s counsel Amrit Pal Singh, who appeared with RK Sharma, told the court that while another appellate bench had allowed the Felda suit to go on trial, Azimah through her decision did not allow Synergy Promenade’s suit to go on trial when she struck out the suit.
Amrit said Azimah had ruled earlier in not allowing the summary judgement that the matter proceed to trial.
He said central to the issue was Azimah found that there was no approval given by the then minister, namely Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
However, Amrit said the former Felda senior officers, in their defence to the suit filed by Felda, stipulated that Najib had given approval for the Jalan Semarak land in exchange for the Kuala Lumpur Vertical City (KLVC) project.
He said that the High Court allowing Synergy Promenade’s suit to be struck out and allowing the Felda suit to proceed was akin to having the company’s hands being tied to its back, when "clearly in our view, there was an agreement given by the minister".
“The company, when filing the suit earlier, did not know the workings behind Felda on this issue,” he said.
Meanwhile, counsel Kumar Kanagasingam for Felda and FIC said Azimah was right in striking out the suit, when Synergy Promenade had failed to show there was no agreement reached by the minister on the joint venture for the project.
“Hence, the High Court was right in its decision to allow the striking out of the suit, as these issues could be ventilated further in Felda’s suit against 20 others, including the company,” he added.
Synergy Promenade's statement of claim filed in July 2019 stipulated, under the agreement, that FIC was required to deliver vacant possession of 24 parcels of land measuring 20.66 acres (8.6 hectares) owned by Felda within 30 days of the signing of the agreement on June 2, 2014, and also ensure that the vacant possession would not be revoked by Felda prior to the completion of the project.
The master developer of the KLVC project claimed that in or around January 2016, Felda and FIC had merely delivered vacant possession of one parcel of land to the company.
In the suit, the company sought a decree of specific performance against Felda and FIC, requiring them to comply with the agreement, and also a consequential order directing them to deliver vacant possession of the aforementioned parcels of land to Synergy Promenade.
Meanwhile, Felda and FIC in November 2019 filed a RM2 billion lawsuit against former chairmen Mohd Isa and Shahrir, together with various former Felda director generals as well as Synergy Promenade, Synergy Promenade KLVC Sdn Bhd, and lawyers over the KLVC project.
Felda and FIC alleged that these parties had jointly conspired for “the plundering” of Felda and FIC through unlawful means, resulting in the injuries of — and losses suffered by — the two.