AS SINGAPOREAN businessman Loo Chay Loo lay in a coma in the United States after a horrific murder-suicide in 2005, his older brother Loo Chay Sit filed court papers here against him - addressed to his hospital bed - staking a claim over his Margate Road home.

After Chay Loo's death, Chay Sit served the writ on his brother's widow - even before Madam Chen Tsui Yu was appointed to administer his estate - by way of a newspaper advertisement, despite having her address.

In Madam Chen's absence, Chay Sit obtained judgment in his favour, transferred the property to himself, then promptly sold it for $4.8 million.

On Tuesday, Chay Sit's actions were criticised by a High Court judge in a 52-page written judgment, as she threw out his claim that the house belonged to him.

Justice Judith Prakash said Chay Sit's conduct in this suit 'left much to be desired' and that the whole proceedings 'smacked of opportunism'.

The judge was not convinced by his claims that he was the rightful owner of the house because he had paid for it; he was often evasive on the stand and made assertions he could not back up.

'All in all, he did not impress me as honest,' she said.

Justice Prakash also dismissed a second suit brought by the brothers' mother, Madam Tan Chan Tee, against Madam Chen, claiming ownership of a house in Seraya Lane.

She found that Madam Tan seemed to be making unsubstantiated claims and her testimony was inconsistent with documentary evidence.

The family members were locked in a court tussle over the two properties after Chay Loo killed himself while awaiting trial for killing his adopted son.

The Margate Road house, off Mountbatten Road, was in his name, while the registered owner of the Seraya Lane house, off Haig Road, was Madam Chen.