Source : Straits Times - 12 Nov 2008
Three of his wives win case to claim unpaid purchase price for house
IN ONE camp were the three octogenarian wives of a late policeman.
In the other, the 47-year-old daughter of his fourth wife.
What they were fighting over in High Court: a $2.05 million semi-detached house, which Mr Seah Wee Tuan left behind when he died in 2005.
The daughter, Madam Seah Min Wai, had bought the Sommerville Road house from her father in 1995 but paid only $10,000 for it.
The three wives, aged 81 to 83, contended that she should return $2.04 million to the old man’s estate - and won.
Last week, Justice Andrew Ang ordered Madam Seah to fork out the unpaid purchase price. If she cannot pay up, the house will have to be sold, and the sales proceeds will be distributed among the four wives.
But with the market downturn, the house is now valued at about $1.8 million. If sales proceeds from the house do not cover the outstanding amount, Madam Seah may have to make up the shortfall.
Her father, who retired in 1969, married the four women through customary rites and had 14 children.
The house being fought over was occupied by him, his fourth wife and their children. His first three wives lived elsewhere.
When Mr Seah died at age 80, he left $55,000 to eight of his children, daughters-in-law, sons-in-law, nephews, nieces and grandchildren. The rest of his estate was to be split among his wives, with the first three getting 20 per cent each, and the fourth, 40 per cent.
The three wives - Madam Cheah Lee Kheng, Madam Wong Kang Choy and Madam Wong Siew Tian - sued Madam Seah to claim the $2.04 million she never paid her father.
Their lawyer, Senior Counsel Molly Lim, argued that the old man had intended for the house to be sold to provide for his wives after his death.
Madam Seah, a former lawyer who represented herself, argued that her father had intended to give her the property.
Ruling in favour of the plaintiffs, Justice Ang said Mr Seah’s intention was to allow her more time to make full payment on the house, not to give it to her.
He also had words about Madam Seah’s conduct during the trial: She was a no-show in court on at least six occasions during the hearing, and her absence was often unsupported by medical certificates.
Justice Ang also noted that she varied her story, at first insisting she had paid for the house in full, then later saying her father had given it to her.
She also made arguments that had no bearing on the main issue.
Source : Straits Times - 12 Nov 2008Three of his wives win case to claim unpaid purchase price for house
IN ONE camp were the three octogenarian wives of a late policeman.
In the other, the 47-year-old daughter of his fourth wife.
What they were fighting over in High Court: a $2.05 million semi-detached house, which Mr Seah Wee Tuan left behind when he died in 2005.
The daughter, Madam Seah Min Wai, had bought the Sommerville Road house from her father in 1995 but paid only $10,000 for it.
The three wives, aged 81 to 83, contended that she should return $2.04 million to the old man’s estate - and won.
Last week, Justice Andrew Ang ordered Madam Seah to fork out the unpaid purchase price. If she cannot pay up, the house will have to be sold, and the sales proceeds will be distributed among the four wives.
But with the market downturn, the house is now valued at about $1.8 million. If sales proceeds from the house do not cover the outstanding amount, Madam Seah may have to make up the shortfall.
Her father, who retired in 1969, married the four women through customary rites and had 14 children.
The house being fought over was occupied by him, his fourth wife and their children. His first three wives lived elsewhere.
When Mr Seah died at age 80, he left $55,000 to eight of his children, daughters-in-law, sons-in-law, nephews, nieces and grandchildren. The rest of his estate was to be split among his wives, with the first three getting 20 per cent each, and the fourth, 40 per cent.
The three wives - Madam Cheah Lee Kheng, Madam Wong Kang Choy and Madam Wong Siew Tian - sued Madam Seah to claim the $2.04 million she never paid her father.
Their lawyer, Senior Counsel Molly Lim, argued that the old man had intended for the house to be sold to provide for his wives after his death.
Madam Seah, a former lawyer who represented herself, argued that her father had intended to give her the property.
Ruling in favour of the plaintiffs, Justice Ang said Mr Seah’s intention was to allow her more time to make full payment on the house, not to give it to her.
He also had words about Madam Seah’s conduct during the trial: She was a no-show in court on at least six occasions during the hearing, and her absence was often unsupported by medical certificates.
Justice Ang also noted that she varied her story, at first insisting she had paid for the house in full, then later saying her father had given it to her.
She also made arguments that had no bearing on the main issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment