1. ) DATO' K. KUMARAENDRAN 2. ) DEVKUMAR A/L K. KUMARAENDRAN 1. ) ALBERT A/L ANTONI TASS 2. ) Selvaraja Namchivayam

1. ) DATO' K. KUMARAENDRAN 2. ) DEVKUMAR A/L K. KUMARAENDRAN 1. ) ALBERT A/L ANTONI TASS 2. ) Selvaraja Namchivayam

The impugned words in the 23.8.2021 letter bore defamatory meanings referring to the Plaintiffs, were published when personnel of the Plaintiffs' firm read the letter, and the Second Defendant is liable for those words as principal for his solicitor; pleaded defences failed for lack of pleaded particulars and evidence, no offer of amends under s7 was made and malice was established; judgment for Plaintiffs with global damages and costs awarded.

Citation
PA-22NCvC-180-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (first Plaintiff): Dato' Seri K. Kumaraendran; Plaintiff (second Plaintiff): Devkumar a/l K. Kumaraendran; First Defendant (deceased): Albert a/l Antoni Tass; Second Defendant: Selvarajah Namachivayam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 August 2025
Case Number
PA-22NCvC-180-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation (libel) / Post Trial Judgment (grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs; Second Defendant liable for libel; claim against First Defendant discontinued (First Defendant deceased).
Legal Topics
Libel, Section 7 Defamation Act 1957 (unintentional Defamation), Qualified Privilege, Justification, Pleading Particulars, Publication, Malice, Damages
Source Language
Malay/English
Defamation Civil Procedure Agency (principal Agent) Evidence Libel Section 7 Defamation Act 1957 (unintentional Defamation) Qualified Privilege Justification +4 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 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dato' Seri K. Kumaraendran

Plaintiff (first Plaintiff)

Devkumar a/l K. Kumaraendran

Plaintiff (second Plaintiff)

Albert a/l Antoni Tass

First Defendant (deceased)

Selvarajah Namachivayam

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation (libel) / Post Trial Judgment (grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Were the impugned words in the 23.8.2021 letter defamatory of the Plaintiffs?
  2. 2 Did the 23.8.2021 letter refer to the Plaintiffs?
  3. 3 Was the 23.8.2021 letter published and was it published with malice?

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned words in the 23.8.2021 letter bore defamatory meanings referring to the Plaintiffs, were published when personnel of the Plaintiffs' firm read the letter, and the Second Defendant is liable for those words as principal for his solicitor; pleaded defences failed for lack of pleaded particulars and evidence, no offer of amends under s7 was made and malice was established; judgment for Plaintiffs with global damages and costs awarded.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiffs; Second Defendant liable for libel; claim against First Defendant discontinued (First Defendant deceased).

Orders

  • Declaration (prayer 33.1) granted
  • Injunction (prayer 33.2) granted