MOHAMED YAACOB BIN HUSAIN 1. ) LAKSHMANAN A/L SUBRAMONIAN 2. ) PENGHUNI-PENGHUNI DI ATAS HARTANAH YANG TERKANDUNG DI DALAM GRN 20686, LOT 10307, MUKIM KLANG, DAERAH KLANG, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
Service was held valid because documents were delivered at the property's address and acknowledged in the presence of D1; the application to set aside was filed out of time (beyond 30 days) without satisfactory explanation; defendants failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence with documentary evidence (bare denial); execution routed via MTSA was procedurally acceptable given enforcement capacity. Therefore the application to set aside the order dated 30.5.2022 is dismissed with costs.
- Citation
- BL-24NCvC-20-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Plaintiff (pentadbir/waris Kadim Bagi Harta Pesaka Husain Bin Mohamed): MOHAMED YAACOB BIN HUSAIN; Defendant 1: LAKSHMANAN A/L SUBRAMONIAN; Defendant 2 (occupant): PENGHUNI DI ATAS HARTANAH YANG TERKANDUNG DIDALAM GRN 20686, LOT 10307, MUKIM KLANG, DAERAH KLANG, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 4 January 2023
- Case Number
- BL-24NCvC-20-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Saman Pemula (possession/land) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (post Judgment)
- Outcome
- Defendants' application to set aside the order dated 30.5.2022 dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Service of Process, Setting Aside Judgment, Possession, Execution of Judgment, Jurisdiction
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
MOHAMED YAACOB BIN HUSAIN
Plaintiff (pentadbir/waris Kadim Bagi Harta Pesaka Husain Bin Mohamed)
LAKSHMANAN A/L SUBRAMONIAN
Defendant 1
PENGHUNI DI ATAS HARTANAH YANG TERKANDUNG DIDALAM GRN 20686, LOT 10307, MUKIM KLANG, DAERAH KLANG, SELANGOR DARUL EHSAN
Defendant 2 (occupant)
Procedural Posture
Saman Pemula (possession/land) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (post Judgment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Validity of service of originating process
- 2 Whether defendants applied in time to set aside judgment
- 3 Whether defendants have a meritorious defence (licence/lease)
Ratio Decidendi
Service was held valid because documents were delivered at the property's address and acknowledged in the presence of D1; the application to set aside was filed out of time (beyond 30 days) without satisfactory explanation; defendants failed to demonstrate a meritorious defence with documentary evidence (bare denial); execution routed via MTSA was procedurally acceptable given enforcement capacity. Therefore the application to set aside the order dated 30.5.2022 is dismissed with costs.
Court Disposition
Defendants' application to set aside the order dated 30.5.2022 dismissed
Orders
- Application by defendants to set aside order dated 30.5.2022 dismissed
- Costs awarded to plaintiff in the sum of RM5000
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment