3 October 2005 – Nusmetro enters into a joint venture with the Koperasi.
5 October 2006 – Planning permission is given by the local authorities.
27 March 2008 – Temporary title (Borang 11AK) (99 year lease) is registered in the name of the Koperasi. The title contains a restriction saying that there can be no transfer, lease, sub-lease or any transaction.
There are also two caveats shown on this temporary title document:
1) Caveat by Nusmetro – registered on 14 April 2008. (Nusmetro had agreed to pay the land premium on behalf of the Koperasi in return for the joint venture agreement.)
2) “Kaveat Pendaftar atas Tanah” – registered on 22 December 2008. (This appears to be in connection with some loan to a borrower. The Housing Loans Section of the Malaysian Treasury applied for the caveat.)
Can planning permission for a plot of land be given before the title is even registered in the name of the applicant? How did this happen?
And what is the final outcome of the state investigative committee’s probe into the land deal? There is no point revealing the results when the houses are already demolished, is there? No more talk of land scams now?
And what is the outcome of the report lodged by residents with the MACC?
AN
07/08/09
5 October 2006 – Planning permission is given by the local authorities.
27 March 2008 – Temporary title (Borang 11AK) (99 year lease) is registered in the name of the Koperasi. The title contains a restriction saying that there can be no transfer, lease, sub-lease or any transaction.
There are also two caveats shown on this temporary title document:
1) Caveat by Nusmetro – registered on 14 April 2008. (Nusmetro had agreed to pay the land premium on behalf of the Koperasi in return for the joint venture agreement.)
2) “Kaveat Pendaftar atas Tanah” – registered on 22 December 2008. (This appears to be in connection with some loan to a borrower. The Housing Loans Section of the Malaysian Treasury applied for the caveat.)
Can planning permission for a plot of land be given before the title is even registered in the name of the applicant? How did this happen?
And what is the final outcome of the state investigative committee’s probe into the land deal? There is no point revealing the results when the houses are already demolished, is there? No more talk of land scams now?
And what is the outcome of the report lodged by residents with the MACC?
AN
07/08/09
No comments:
Post a Comment