Justice Nor Bee Ariffin ruled the tenancy agreement between the boutique and mall had expired in July 2014, and during that time, BritishIndia’s operator BTC Clothier, refused to accept a new tenancy agreement.
“The court found there was no contractual relationship between the tenant (BritishIndia) and landlord (KLCC) as the tenancy agreement had ended in July 2014.”
“The landlord did not unlawfully dismiss the agreement,” she said in her oral judgment.
She added that KLCC was entitled to the vacant premises and BritishIndia had the obligation to move out.
“The tenant had breached the agreement after the last tenancy agreement ended by refusing to leave and not giving back the shop lot to their landlord,” said Justice Nor Bee. “The boutique continuing their stay is deemed illegal.”
She allowed KLCC’s counterclaim against BritishIndia, under the Civil Law Act, on claiming double the amount of rent after the last tenancy ended in July 2014.
After the judge finished her oral decision, the mall’s lawyer Cecil Abraham told the court that the double rent amount BritishIndia have to pay was RM6.7 million, beginning from 8 July 2014 when the tenancy ended. “I have been instructed to seek RM250,000 in cost,” he said.
BritishIndia’s lawyer Khong Jo Ee said they are only offering RM15,000 in cost.
“I would like to ask the court to give a stay of execution on paying the double rent. I have been given orders to appeal,” she said.
Justice Nor Bee told Khong to file a formal application for stay of execution on paying the RM6.7 million.
She ordered BritishIndia to pay RM100,000 in cost.
In July 2014, BTC Clothier filed a suit against Suria KLCC claiming that the shopping mall had wrongfully terminated the lease agreement via a letter dated 4 July 2014.
In its statement of claim, BTC Clothier said Suria KLCC had threatened to close the BritishIndia premises at 10 pm on 7 July 2014, if the clothing store refused to accept a new tenancy offer.
BTC Clothier wants a declaration that the existing rental agreement between them was still valid and that the action of the defendant to terminate it was unlawful.
BTC Clothier also demanded that the mall or their employees do not disturb the running of the business at the said premises, or close or block product display.
The fashion store was also seeking general damages, interest, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.
BTC Clothier, which sells branded clothing and household items, has 13 branches in Malaysia and five in Singapore besides a retail chain all over Southeast Asia.