DEVARAJAN A/L KUNASEKARAN 1. ) LEON NGIM CHONG 2. ) TEE SOK KHIM

DEVARAJAN A/L KUNASEKARAN 1. ) LEON NGIM CHONG 2. ) TEE SOK KHIM

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the Sessions Court had decided based on evidence, did not act on any wrong principle of law or misapprehend facts, and its awards for general and special damages were within reasonable bounds; the appellant failed to strictly prove allowances, extended incapacity, or inevitability of future loss/surgery so appellate interference was unwarranted.

Citation
BA-12B-59-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Devarajan a/l Kunasekaran; Respondent/defendant: Leon Ngim Chong; Respondent/defendant: Tee Sok Khim
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 September 2024
Case Number
BA-12B-59-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / High Court (appeal on Quantum)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, General Damages, Special Damages, Loss of Earnings, Future Loss of Earnings, Loss of Consciousness, Head Injury, Facial Bone Fractures, Appellate Review Standard
Source Language
Malay/English
Personal Injury Tort Motor Vehicle Accidents Civil Procedure Damages Assessment Quantum of Damages General Damages Special Damages +6 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 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devarajan a/l Kunasekaran

Appellant/plaintiff

Leon Ngim Chong

Respondent/defendant

Tee Sok Khim

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (personal Injury) / High Court (appeal on Quantum)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellate court should interfere with the trial judge's assessment of quantum
  2. 2 Whether loss of consciousness is separately compensable apart from head injury
  3. 3 Whether awards for lacerations and abrasions were inadequate

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court dismissed the appeal because the Sessions Court had decided based on evidence, did not act on any wrong principle of law or misapprehend facts, and its awards for general and special damages were within reasonable bounds; the appellant failed to strictly prove allowances, extended incapacity, or inevitability of future loss/surgery so appellate interference was unwarranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Sessions Court awards upheld