UNCle and newphey dispute ownership of EDM survery instrument.

 draft:  Wed 20 July 2016

PENAMPANG. The ownership of a land survey instrument called EDM (electronic distance meter) was disputed between a man from Kg Nosoob and his nephew who lives in Menggatal, and heard in the native court here Wednesday.

 

The uncle as plaintiff, claimed to be the sole owner of the EDM in 2013 purchased from a shop at Pekan Penampang Baru for RM16 thousand and paid in four instalment. It was bought through a third person because he had facility to buy via instalment with the shop and the price was fully paid in May 2013. The uncle said he is not good in using the instrument while his nephew is the “expert” hence he became responsible to use it full time as a freelance surveyor, and it is still kept by him.

In November 2014 their working relationship ended when the nephew cannot be contacted by phone. When asked by the court, he cited being busy to go to the nephew’s house and did not contact his elder brother, the nephew’s father because the guy is not bothered with the matter.

As the case was initially heard in chamber, he repeated his submission that the instrument was paid out of his own income and not from any projects that he and his nephew had done together through verbal agreement.

The court then requested the plaintiff to submit documentary proof such as payment voucher for the EDM, a statutory declaration from the third party that he is now the owner and any other proof of ownership.

In his defence, the nephew disagreed with the uncle on the ownership of the instrument. He claimed to have resigned from his job in order to work together in land surveying projects. Before resigning he had verbal agreement based on trust that the instrument will be provided for him. Together they had gone to buy the EDM where he chose the suitable instrument based on his expertise while the uncle and the third person who had the facility to buy in instalment dealt with the shop.

He claimed he had paid a portion for the EDM through deduction of his payment from the projects but admits he never kept any of the payment vouchers for him.

He disagreed with the uncle that no such discussion was made regarding the payment for the EDM.

He paid the third party and I paid him but this was not in writing due to family trust, he said.

 

When the court asked both parties if they could propose some compromise on this dispute, the uncle answered he will leave to the court to decide on the ownership. “If proven that I am the owner, I will allow the nephew to continue using it but not to own it illegally”, he said. He had worked for 20 months and could have bought his own set by now, he added.

 

The panel of judges comprising District Chief Bryan Matasing, Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun and Village Chief Michael Sigawal then adjourned the hearing for the verdict on 16 August 2013.