ixeo : fazidk hit the nail on the head when he stated hanky panky along with many of our brethren albeit in different words.
Lets recap:-
1. Availability of tenancy agreement between businessman and JMC is unsure at the moment! A stamped copy MUST be in JMC office, dig it out. No tenancy agreement, no reimbursement whatsoever and nothing to discuss. This clearly shows JMC at fault for allowing third party to operate in within its premises without any agreement whatsoever.
2. This case is between residents and JMC, as the committee also comprises of elected members or appointed residents in the condo to act on behalf of the condo residents interests. Not between the residents and the businessman. I believe there is and should have a by-law on JMC, try to get the statutes and study them and see what options are available to you if JMC is improperly managed. You may want to consider hiring a lawyer or at least together with the residents after you are clear on what option you may want to exercise.
No matter what, if you do reach that stage, you would really want to know who would be available for election and having the proper credentials for the job, otherwise it back to square one!
Out of curiosity I have a 2 questions:-
A. How long has the business been in operation?
B. How much losses is the businessman claiming against the JMC for his "RND" research and development failure?
A. 31 years.
B. Claiming "incentive" of RM1.7 billion. The businessman never used the word "claim", "grant" or "reimbursement"