Section 121(1)(a) of the NLC states that where in pursuance of Section 52, for an agricultural land, the State Authority may exercise of its power under Section 120 of the NLC to impose such conditions as it may think suitable in regards to a cultivation or crop. Besides that, subsection (c) provides that the State Authority may fix the dates in any year on or before which any agricultural activity must be completed.

            Next, Section 125(2)(a) of the NLC mentioned that subject to a fixed term, a breach of condition shall arise in the case of a condition requiring to commit any act within any time is not fulfilled within the specified expiry date. Accordingly, in Section 126 of NLC, where any condition consists of two or more separate obligation or liabilities, a failure to fulfill any of those obligations or liabilities shall constitute a breach of the condition.

            In addition, Section 115(1)(d) of the NLC provides that the whole area of the land alienated shall be maintained and cultivated according to the rules of good husbandry and later, subsection (e) states that the said area shall be continuously cultivated.

            Pertaining to this issue, the Land Administrator has imposed two expressed conditions to Zikri upon the alienated land and also provided such fixed date to complete the said cultivation which is two years. However, Zikri has failed to fulfil the conditions as it has been more than five years since the land was alienated to him in which he exceeds the period of two years and he even left the land idle.

            Therefore, Zikri has breached the expressed conditions stipulated in his Document of Title due to his failure to cultivate palm oil trees on the agricultural land within two years and eventually left the land idle, according to Section 126 of the NLC 1965.

The second issue is whether the State Authority is entitled to reverse the land that has been alienated to Zikri since Zikri has left the land idle without cultivating it within the fixed two years according to Section 41 of NLC and Section 46(1)(b).

According to Section 41 of the NLC, the State Authority have all the rights to reverse the land and other similar rights conferred by section 46. Meanwhile, Section 46(1)(b) provides that State Authority has the power to reverse the land upon publication in the Gazette of a notice under Section 130 when a notice published on the making of an order of forfeiture by the Land Administrator on the grounds of non-payment of rent or breach of condition.

In the case of Tan Ah Boon v State of Johor, the Collector of Land Revenue which is the State Authority had signified his approval to the alienation of 110 acres of State land to the appellant on payment of specified sums as and by way of premium as well as rent, and on certain other terms. The premium and the first year's rent was deposited as stipulated, but no grant had actually been executed or registered. The appellant paid the rent for 6 years but did not pay rent thereafter. The Collector then proceeded to attach and sell the land, and on a suit filed by the purchaser, The Collector repossess the land.

In regards to this issue, Zikri doesn’t fulfil the required terms stipulated in the Document of Title where it then gives the right for the State Authority to claim the said land. Zikri also has been given time to cultivate the land within two years but he failed to exercise it even after five years since the land was alienated to him.

To conclude, the State Authority is entitled to reverse the land that has been alienated to Zikri since Zikri has left the land idle without cultivating it within the fixed two years according to Section 41 of NLC and Section 46(1)(b). Thus, Zikri may lose the right on the alienated land because of his abandonment to cultivate the palm oil trees.

 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)

The categories of land use and classification of land are two different things. Generally, the categories of land use indicate the type of usage of the land is subjected to, whereas the classification of land refers to the location of the land. 

There are provisions provided under the National Land Code in order to differentiate between both classification and categories of land. As for categories of land use, it is provided under Section 52 (1) until Section 56 of the National Land Code. According to Section 52 (1), there are three categories of land use known respectively as agriculture, building, and industry. There are also conditions affecting these three categories of land use such as express conditions and implied conditions. Under express condition, there are provisions provided under Section 120 until Section 122. On the other hand, for implied conditions, the provisions provided are from Section 114 until Section 117 of the NLC.

 The land in Malaysia, on the other hand, is classified under Section 51 of the National Land Code 1965. Section 51 (1) provides that the land is classified into two which are the land above the shoreline and the foreshore and sea-bed. Section 51 (2) then further states the land above the shoreline is classified into town, village and country land. 

Town land and village land are the land in any area of the State which is declared in accordance with Section 11to be respectively a town and a village or by virtue of Section 442 deemed to be a town and a village while country land is all land above the shoreline other than town land and village land. 

B. Conditions and restrictions in interest.

The differences between the conditions and the restriction in interest are which the imposition by the State Authority of obligations for conditions is relating to the use of land such as agricultural, building and industrial purposes while for restriction is relating to a limitation on the powers conferred to a proprietor to deal with the land alienated to him or her. 

In Section 120 (1) (a) of National Land Code, it was stated that the State Authority may alienate land subject to express conditions determined at the time when the land is approved for alienation. There are two types of conditions which are express conditions and implied conditions. Express conditions are conditions that are endorsed on the document of title of the land and relate to the use of land such as express conditions in respect of land held under agriculture is “This land may only be used to plant rubber trees” or for land held under building is “This land is to be used as a residence only” or for land held under category of industrial is “This land is to be used for the purpose of a petrol station”. 

Meanwhile, in Section 114 to Section 118 of NLC stated that implied conditions which are specified in the National Land Code itself in relation to the type of category of land use that the land is subjected to and they are not endorsed on the document of title. Accordingly, the effect of non-compliance with the conditions, the land will be liable to forfeiture to the State Authority as stated in Section 127 (1)(a) of NLC.

The term ‘restriction in interest’ is defined in Section 5 of the NLC as any limitation imposed by the State Authority towards a proprietor by Part Nine or on any of his powers of dealing. It relates with the rights of the proprietor to deal with his land but there is limitation or restriction which imposed by the State Authority to the proprietor. 

For instance, the common restrictions in interest imposed by the State Authority is read as follows, “This land may not be transferred, charged or leased without the written consent from the State Authority”. Thus, it shows that the consent from the state authority is important in respect of applying for subdivision, partition or amalgamation. If the consent is not being approved, the proprietor can appeal for the consent.
  Besides, in Section 105 of the NLC regarding every restriction in interest, it shall continue in force until the reversion of the State Authority of the land to which it relates. This can be seen in the case of Dr. Ti Teow Seow & Ors v Pendaftar Geran-geran Tanah Negeri Selangor where it stated that the land which subject to the restriction in interest cannot be transferred or leased for a period of 15 years without the consent of the Ruler in council. This indicates that the restriction in interest could not have commenced before the date of registration because the land remained State Land.   
    To sum up, in order to alienate the land, the state authority may imposed the conditions and restriction in interest towards the proprietor.