SUNDRA RAJOO A/L NADARAJAH 1. ) THOMAS THOMAS @ MOHAN A/L K. THOMAS 2. ) KHONG HUI LI 3. ) MOHD ADRIAN ZAIMAN BIN ZAINIAR 4. ) MD YUSRIN BIN MD YUSOF 5. ) MOHD FADHLY BIN MOHD ZAMRY 6. ) NESAVAN A/L THEYVENDRAM 7. ) SHARAN RAJ A/L GOVINDASA

SUNDRA RAJOO A/L NADARAJAH 1. ) THOMAS THOMAS @ MOHAN A/L K. THOMAS 2. ) KHONG HUI LI 3. ) MOHD ADRIAN ZAIMAN BIN ZAINIAR 4. ) MD YUSRIN BIN MD YUSOF 5. ) MOHD FADHLY BIN MOHD ZAMRY 6. ) NESAVAN A/L THEYVENDRAM 7. ) SHARAN RAJ A/L GOVINDASA

The court held the Defendants' striking out application must be dismissed because the statement of claim, read in the plaintiff’s favour, discloses a cause of action and raises disputed facts and substantial legal questions which require a full trial; and paras 56 and 57 of the First Defendant's affidavit were expunged as scandalous and oppressive given the binding Federal Court ruling that the plaintiff enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution for acts in his official capacity, rendering those averments unnecessary and improper.

Citation
WA-21NCVC-187-10/2021 (LAMPIRAN 12) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Defendant/appellant: Thomas Thomas @ Mohan a/l K. Thomas; Defendant/appellant: Khong Hui Li; Defendant/appellant: Mohd Adrian Zaiman bin Zainiar; Defendant/appellant: Md Yusrin bin Md Yusof; Defendant/appellant: Mohd Fadhly bin Mohd Zamry; Defendant/appellant: Nesavan a/l Theyvendram; Defendant/appellant: Sharan Raj a/l Govindasamy; Defendant/appellant: Hasmizzy bin Md Hasim; Defendant/appellant: Kamal Baharin bin Omar; Defendant/appellant: Mohd Zaki bin Mohd Salleh; Defendant/appellant: Mohamad Shukri bin Abdull; Defendant/appellant: Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia; Defendant/appellant: Kerajaan Malaysia; Respondent/plaintiff: Sundra Rajoo a/l Nadarajah
Court
LAMPIRAN 12
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
21 July 2022
Case Number
WA-21NCVC-187-10/2021 (LAMPIRAN 12) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (interlocutory) / Interlocutory Applications: Striking Out and Expungement Hearings at High Court Level
Outcome
Defendants' striking out application dismissed; Plaintiff's expungement application partially allowed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, State/diplomatic Immunity, Striking Out Under Order 18 R.19 Rules of Court 2012, Expungement of Affidavit (order 41 R.6), Res Judicata, Malicious Prosecution, False Imprisonment, Misfeasance in Public Office
Source Language
Malay/English
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Civil Procedure Public International Law Criminal Law Judicial Review State/diplomatic Immunity Striking Out Under Order 18 R.19 Rules of Court 2012 +5 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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Thomas @ Mohan a/l K. Thomas

Defendant/appellant

Khong Hui Li

Defendant/appellant

Mohd Adrian Zaiman bin Zainiar

Defendant/appellant

Md Yusrin bin Md Yusof

Defendant/appellant

Mohd Fadhly bin Mohd Zamry

Defendant/appellant

Nesavan a/l Theyvendram

Defendant/appellant

Sharan Raj a/l Govindasamy

Defendant/appellant

Hasmizzy bin Md Hasim

Defendant/appellant

Kamal Baharin bin Omar

Defendant/appellant

Mohd Zaki bin Mohd Salleh

Defendant/appellant

Mohamad Shukri bin Abdull

Defendant/appellant

Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia

Defendant/appellant

Kerajaan Malaysia

Defendant/appellant

Sundra Rajoo a/l Nadarajah

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (interlocutory) / Interlocutory Applications: Striking Out and Expungement Hearings at High Court Level

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff's writ and statement of claim disclose a reasonable cause of action or are frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process under Order 18 r.19
  2. 2 Whether civil proceedings challenging the Attorney General's exercise of discretion under Article 145(3) are sustainable
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution as a former High Officer under Act 485 and related instruments and whether that bars aspects of the civil claim

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the Defendants' striking out application must be dismissed because the statement of claim, read in the plaintiff’s favour, discloses a cause of action and raises disputed facts and substantial legal questions which require a full trial; and paras 56 and 57 of the First Defendant's affidavit were expunged as scandalous and oppressive given the binding Federal Court ruling that the plaintiff enjoyed immunity from criminal prosecution for acts in his official capacity, rendering those averments unnecessary and improper.

Court Disposition

Defendants' striking out application dismissed; Plaintiff's expungement application partially allowed

Orders

  • Defendants' striking out application (Enclosure 12) dismissed with costs of RM10,000 to the Plaintiff
  • Plaintiff's application to expunge parts of the First Defendant's affidavit (Enclosure 20) allowed in part: paras 56 and 57 expunged; nominal costs of RM2,000 to the Plaintiff