Explain the differences between the following and give examples to   illustrate:

a.     Categories of land use and classification of land;

b.     Conditions and restrictions in interest.

 

(12 marks)

Based on the Section 115(1)(e) of National Land Code provides that any alienated land to the category of agriculture land shall be continuously cultivated the said area as a condition to the proprietor.

Next, in Section 127 (1)(a) of National Land Code says that the land shall become liable to forfeiture to the State Authority if any condition is breached.

The proprietor of the land need to follow the implied condition that has been stated for the said land. As in the case of Collector of Land Revenue (JB) v South Malaysia Industries Bhd, the land was leased and alienated to the respondent company as an industrial land with condition that the land is to be used solely for erection of a factory and only for light industry. A portion of land was rented out and being used to store industrial chemicals and fertilizer. The Collector deemed that such use of land as a breach of condition. The respondent company brought an action against the Collector that the proceeding against it was illegal as there is no special condition prohibiting the use of land as a store. The Court of Appeal held that the express conditions imposed an imperative obligation on the respondent to use the factory premises for light industry. Therefore, storing of industrial chemicals and fertilizers was not a legitimate purpose of use permitted under the lease.

The effect of breached implied condition could be seen in the case of Che Minah bt Rameli v Pentadbir Tanah Daerah Besut & Anor, the plaintiff was a registered proprietor of land held under the category 'agriculture' in Besut. Later, she was being notified that there was a breach of an implied condition under section 115 by the Besut land officer. This is because there were several building on the land including a sundry shop and surau. After the plaintiff made an application to change the category of land, her application was rejected. The defendant made an order that the breach of condition should be remedied within 15 days otherwise it would be forfeited.

By applying to the case based on the rule that have been specified above, the proprietor that have an alienated land under the category of agriculture land need to cultivate the area of land continuously as it is under the implied condition for the registered proprietor land. If the proprietor does the breach, the land may be forfeited by the State Authority. 

Thus, the land may be forfeited by the State Authority under section 115(1) (e) and 127 of National Land Code due to Zikri's act of breaching the implied condition when he failed to continuously cultivate the land by leaving the land idle for more than five years.
Group Members:
1. Nurul Athirah bt Basri (1181845)
2. Nushaibah bt Badruddin (1181847)
3. Nur Hasya Aiman bt Amir (1181849)

There are a few differences between the category of the land use and the classification of the land. Firstly, the category of the land use to refer to the types of the usage of the land subjected to which relates to the nature of the use of a particular land as allowed under the code. Meanwhile, the classification of land essentially indicates the location of the land. 

Secondly, there are also provisions to explain and differentiate the category of land use and the Classification of land essentially indicates the location of the land under National Land Code. For the categories of land, Section 52(1) of National Land Code stated that there are 3 categories of land use known respectively as agriculture, building and industry. Other than that, In Section 52(1)(b)(i) and (ii) of the National Land Code, there two conditions that give effect towards the categories of land such as express condition and implied condition. For the express condition for the categories of the land use in term of agriculture, building and industry, it is provided under Section 120, Section 121 and Section 122 of the National Land Code. The express condition mans the condition that are endorsed on the IDT to the land and to the use of the land. Besides, for implied condition, it is vested in Section 114, Section 115, Section 116 and Section 117 of the National Land Code which means is not written in the document of titles as in the case of express condition and the condition implied on the land base on the category of the land.

The provision to explain the classification is based on Section 51 of the National Land Code 1965. Section 51(1) of National Land Code provides that the land is classified as land above the shoreline and foreshore and seabed. Furthermore, Section 51(2) of National Land Code stated that Land above the shoreline: Town Land, Village Land and Country Land. According to Section 77 of the National Land Code, in respect of the town or village or any lot of country land that exceeds 4 hectares in area was governed by the Register of Title State and Registry, however, if the land of the country which not exceed 4 hectares, it will administer by Land Administrator-District Land Office.

Hence, there are examples of the categories of the land use for Agriculture, which is for the purpose of planting the Palm Tree and other. For building, it can be for the single storey terrace house or town house for the issue document of title (IDT) whereas the condominium is example for strata title. The industry is mainly used for the purpose of factories. However, for the classification of land, land above the shoreline can be a town, village or country land. A town land is situated in a town declared under Section 11 of National Land Code or under the relevant provision of the land laws before it by virtue to Section 442 of the National Land Code.

b) Differences between conditions and restriction in interest

 

There are some differences of the conditions and restriction. Firstly, for the condition, the State authority may alienate land subject to express conditions. conditions that endorsed on the IDT to the land and relate to the use of land. The example of express condition in respect of land held under the category of agriculture. The land may only be used to plant rubber trees. Another example of express condition for land held under category of building. As an example, the building to be erected on this land is only for the purpose of a residence. If they breach the condition:  the land subject to forfeiture.

In the case of Pengarah Tanah dan Galian, Wilayah Persekutuan v Sri Lempah Enterprise Sdn Bhd, the respondents owned land in perpetuity and applied for the subdivision and conversion of land for the purpose of hotel service. Then, the approval has given subject to conditions that stated to lease for 99 years. The respondent rejected the conditions. The court held that, the authorities have no power to make the respondents surrender their freeholder land and receive in exchange a 99 years lease. It was stated that the committee should act fairly and not arbitrarily.

However, for restriction, unlike the express conditions, a restriction in interest does not deal with land use.  It is a limitation or restriction on the right on, of the registered proprietor in respect of applying for subdivision, partition or amalgamation of the land or the right to enter into dealing in respect of land. As an example of restriction in interest is, that certain land under the power of State Authority may not be transferred, charged, or leased without written consent of the State Authority. If breach the restriction in interest, the application is voidable/instrument unfit for registration.

In the case of Dr Ti Teow Seow & Ors v Pendaftar Geran-Geran Tanah Negeri Selangor, the land subject to restriction in interest is “cannot be transferred or leased for a period of 15 years’ washout the consent of the Ruler in council.”  The date of commencement of title on18th August 1964. The alienation was registered on 9th November 1967 and sold on 25 March 1980.  The memorandum of transfer and charge signed on 5th May 1980. The respondent rejected the registration on the ground of the restriction in interest is still subsisting. The applicant claimed restriction in interest has lapsed. The court held that, in the accordance of Section 78(3) of NLC, it is clear that the restriction in interest could not have commenced before the date of registration because the land remained State land and the restriction could not have meant to operate on the State Authority.

In conclusion, the state authority may imposed the conditions and restrictions in the interest towards the proprietor for the purpose of alienation the land.