KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 6): Investors in an agarwood scheme promoted by Asian Plantation Capital (APC) not only failed to receive any returns on their investment but also didn't see purchase money returned to them, the court heard on Tuesday.

Nor Anita Abu Talib, one of the 173 plaintiffs suing APC Pte Ltd and others over the scheme they allege is fraudulent, said this while on the witness stand as the first witness in the trial. 

This is one of the many court cases involving APC over the agarwood scheme.

In this particular case, the investors have named 20 defendants, which include APC Pte Ltd, Asian Plantation Singapore Pte Ltd, APS Asia Plantation Bhd, and Asia Plantation Capital Bhd among others.

They are seeking declarations that the defendants made fraudulent representations to the plaintiffs, to lift the corporate veil and that directors linked to the defendants are the real "alter ego" responsible for the losses suffered by the plaintiffs.

In her witness statement, Nor Anita said that she had purchased a total of 300 agarwood trees in Thailand for a total of RM197,000. She had made three separate purchases between 2011 to 2013, with the understanding that the trees would be ready for harvest and sale in about seven years.

"I understood that my return would depend on the amount of agarwood oil obtained from the trees. The documents stated a rate of SG$400 (using the current value, then) for each tola of oil and described that rate as guaranteed. I also understood that the actual yield could vary and that harvesting costs and sales commission would be deducted," she said.

Tola is a traditional South Asian unit of weight of about 11.66g. Agarwood, when "wounded" or infected, produces the much sought after fragrant resin used in perfume and incense. Agarwood is also popularly known as “Oud”.

In her testimony, Nor Anita said that she expected APC and "the people" working for the company to "care for the trees, inoculate them when they are ready, and arrange the harvest and sale".

"[But] I did not receive the regular reports or clear updates that I had expected about my trees.

"I was not given clear proof that my trees had been harvested and sold. I was also not given a proper account showing any sale proceeds from my trees," she added.

She said that she made her payments to Asia Plantation Singapore as directed, because she believed that it was collecting the money for her APC purchases. She added that Asia Plantation Singapore's name appeared in all of the booking forms and receipts.

During cross-examination by one of the defendants' counsel Lavinia Kumaraendran, Nor Anita agreed that she entered into the contract with APC, who was the planter of the trees and not the other defendants.

Among others, the plaintiffs are seeking RM21,358,613.00 linked to the purchase of these agarwood trees. They are also asking the defendants to pay each of the plaintiffs RM118,830.00 for marketing fees.

The plaintiffs are represented by Hakem Arabi & Associates, while Messrs Susielan & Associates, Messrs Lavania & Balan Chambers, Messrs Kamil Hashim Raj & Lin, Messrs Subramaniam & Shafiqt, and Messrs Elyas Majeed & Co represented the different defendants.

The trial before Judicial Commissioner (JC) Elesabet Paya Wan continues.