High Court judge Anand Ponnudurai dismissed two consolidated suits brought by the First Residence Management Corporation and Wong Peng Hung, who represented the 94 residential and commercial unit owners. (Reuters pic)KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has ruled that a utility room and 115 parking bays at the First Residence condominium in Kepong belong to their registered owner, rejecting the management corporation's and 94 unit owners' application to have them declared common property.Justice Anand Ponnudurai dismissed two consolidated suits brought by the First Residence Management Corporation (FRMC) and Wong Peng Hung, who represented the 94 residential and commercial unit owners."The inevitable conclusion is that the plaintiffs have failed to prove on a balance of probabilities their various claims against the defendants," Anand said in his 90-page grounds of judgment.The plaintiffs had brought the suit against TSI Property Management Sdn Bhd, the registered proprietor of the disputed property, and TSI Domain Sdn Bhd, the developer of the mixed residential and commercial development.The dispute centred on a 15.42 sq m utility room, known as Utility 1, together with 115 accessory car park parcels on Level 1 of the development.FRMC and the purchasers contended that the utility room and car parks formed part of the common property but had been unlawfully carved out and sold by the developer to TSI Property Management.The plaintiffs also sought to set aside the strata title, alleging fraud in its issuance, and claimed the development was left with insufficient visitor and disabled parking.However, Anand held that the plaintiffs had failed to establish fraud or any other grounds under Section 340(2) of the National Land Code to defeat TSI Property Management's registered title.He noted that although they alleged the planning authorities had been deceived into approving the subdivision and issuing the strata titles, they did not call any witness from Kuala Lumpur City Hall, the federal territories land and mines office, or the survey and mapping department."Having made that choice, they cannot now invite this court to find that those authorities were deceived without the benefit of any evidence from the alleged victims of the purported fraud," he said.The judge also ruled that Utility 1 and the 115 car park bays were never designated as common property in the certi…
Summary from source