BALAKRISHNA BALARAVI PILLAI PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD

BALAKRISHNA BALARAVI PILLAI PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD

The plaintiff failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, the existence or nature of a foreign object and failed to discharge the burden to show the defendant knew or ought to have known of the hazard; the defendant's contemporaneous patrol records were credible and established reasonable monitoring, therefore no negligence was proven and appeal must be dismissed.

Citation
AA-12B-38-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Balakrishna Balaravi Pillai; Respondent/defendant: Projek Lebuhraya Usahasama Berhad
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 April 2025
Case Number
AA-12B-38-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Highway Negligence, Burden of Proof, Causation, Inspection and Patrol Obligations, Strict Liability Vs Negligence
Source Language
Malay/English
Tort Negligence Civil Procedure Evidence Highway/concessionaire Liability Highway Negligence Burden of Proof Causation +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Balakrishna Balaravi Pillai

Appellant/plaintiff

Projek Lebuhraya Usahasama Berhad

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Judgment on Appeal From Sessions Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff proved existence and nature of foreign object on highway
  2. 2 Whether defendant breached duty of care in maintaining the highway
  3. 3 Whether plaintiff discharged burden of proof under Evidence Act s102

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, the existence or nature of a foreign object and failed to discharge the burden to show the defendant knew or ought to have known of the hazard; the defendant's contemporaneous patrol records were credible and established reasonable monitoring, therefore no negligence was proven and appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs RM2000.00