PEMPETISYEN SUTHAGAR A/L UTRAPATHY 1. ) JAMUNA A/P SANATHEPATHEY 2. ) SARAVANAN A/L MUTHUSAMY 3. ) Yogeswary A/p Kumaresan

PEMPETISYEN SUTHAGAR A/L UTRAPATHY 1. ) JAMUNA A/P SANATHEPATHEY 2. ) SARAVANAN A/L MUTHUSAMY 3. ) Yogeswary A/p Kumaresan

R1 failed to prove adultery on the balance of probabilities because the evidence was uncorroborated, inconsistent and largely circumstantial, with no contemporaneous WhatsApp messages, photos or videos proving physical intimacy; therefore R1's claim for RM150,000 against R3 is dismissed and costs awarded to R3.

Citation
JA-33-382-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: Suthagar A/L Utrapathy; First Respondent: Jamuna A/P Sanathepathey; Second Respondent: Saravanmuthu A/L Muthusamy; Third Respondent: Yogeeswary A/P Kumaresan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 October 2025
Case Number
JA-33-382-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Adultery, Damages, Costs, Custody, Standard of Proof
Source Language
Malay/English
Family Law Matrimonial Law Evidence Adultery Damages Costs Custody Standard of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Suthagar A/L Utrapathy

Petitioner

Jamuna A/P Sanathepathey

First Respondent

Saravanmuthu A/L Muthusamy

Second Respondent

Yogeeswary A/P Kumaresan

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the First Respondent proved on balance of probabilities that the Third Respondent committed adultery with the Petitioner and that it caused the breakdown of the marriage
  2. 2 Whether the First Respondent is entitled to damages of RM150,000.00 from the Third Respondent

Ratio Decidendi

R1 failed to prove adultery on the balance of probabilities because the evidence was uncorroborated, inconsistent and largely circumstantial, with no contemporaneous WhatsApp messages, photos or videos proving physical intimacy; therefore R1's claim for RM150,000 against R3 is dismissed and costs awarded to R3.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • R1's claim against R3 for RM150,000 dismissed
  • R1 to pay costs of RM10,000.00 to R3, subject to allocator fees, to be paid within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Order