Ooi Hoe San trading as Seng Bee Rubber Co v Kim Teng Realty Pte Ltd

JurisdictionSingapore
JudgeA P Rajah J
Judgment Date19 November 1982
Neutral Citation[1982] SGHC 35
Docket NumberDistrict Court Appeal No 73 of 1980
Date19 November 1982
Published date19 September 2003
Year1982
Plaintiff CounselP Suppiah (P Suppiah Co)
Citation[1982] SGHC 35
Defendant CounselTan Ching Tiong (Wee Swee Teow & Co)
CourtHigh Court (Singapore)
Subject MatterClaim for possession against first defendant,Claim for possession,Rent-controlled premises,Premises sub-let to another,Landlord and Tenant,Whether second defendant became statutory tenant,ss 15(1)(g), 26 & 27(a) Control of Rent Act (Cap 266)

This is an appeal by the second defendant against the judgment of the learned district judge wherein he allowed recovery of possession against both the first and second defendants. The first defendant has not appealed.

The history of the case is as follows: The plaintiffs became owners of 327 Beach Road (the premises), subject matter of the action, sometime in 1972.
Prior to that date Messrs Alkaff & Co either the owners or the managers of the property, had rented the premises sometime in 1966 to the first defendant at a rental of $67 per mensem. The premises are rent controlled and the case proceeded on the basis that there was no provision against sub-letting. The first defendant then furnished the empty premises with six writing tables, one steel cabinet, two weighing machines for weighing rubber, ten chairs and a shelf for putting letters (p 52 of Record) and carried on a rubber business there under the firm or style of Buan Guan Heng. It would appear that with the consent of Messrs Alkaff & Co, the first defendant sub-let the premises in 1970 to the firm of Seng Bee Rubber Co, the partners of which at that time were the second defendant and Tay Bok Choon.

The plaintiffs purchased the property sometime in 1972 and soon after that they served a notice to quit dated 26 October 1972 (AB2) on the first defendant.
As a result thereof the first defendant became a statutory tenant of the plaintiffs as from 1 December 1972. By a further notice to quit dated 6 September 1979 (AB7) and served on the first defendant at the premises the plaintiffs required him to `quit and deliver up possession of the house and premises known as 327 Beach Road, Singapore held by you as tenant` on 31 October 1979 (or on the expiration of the month of his tenancy which will expire next after the end of one calendar month from the time of the service of the notice). The plaintiffs then took out a district court summons on 7 November 1979 against the first and second defendants whereby they sought to recover possession of the premises against the first defendant on the ground that he was not a statutory tenant under s 27(a) of the Control of Rent Act (Cap 266) (the Act) and against the second defendant on the ground that he was in unlawful occupation of the premises.

During the course of the trial, more exactly when the first defendant was being cross-examined, the statement of claim was amended as follows:

Further and in the alternative on the ground that the first defendant has sublet the premises to the second defendant and receives from the second defendant in respect
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT