KARPAYA A/L MALIANDY (INDIA CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION DEPARTMENT) KERISNAN@KRISHNAN A/L MALAYAANDY (NO. KP: 431213-10-5063)

KARPAYA A/L MALIANDY (INDIA CIVIL SUPPLIES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION DEPARTMENT) KERISNAN@KRISHNAN A/L MALAYAANDY (NO. KP: 431213-10-5063)

ID22, a certified extract from the Register of Births issued under the BDRA 1957, was admissible and provided strong presumptive evidence that the respondent was not the deceased's son; viewing the evidence in totality the respondent obtained the Land Administrator's distribution order by fraudulent concealment and lacked locus to petition under SEDA 1955; consequently the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court decision and the distribution order and granted the appellant the reliefs sought in paragraph 18 of the amended statement of claim together with specified costs and ancillary orders.

Citation
B-02(NCVC)(W)-799-07/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Karpaya a/l Maliandy (by Ganesan a/l Karuppiah as attorney); Respondent / Defendant: Kerisnan @ Krishnan a/l Malayaandy
Court
NCVC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 April 2021
Case Number
B-02(NCVC)(W)-799-07/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court (appeal Allowed)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; distribution order set aside and reliefs in paragraph 18 of amended statement of claim granted.
Legal Topics
Small Estates (distribution) Act 1955, Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957, Admissibility of Public Records, Fraud in Probate/distribution Proceedings, Appellate Review Plainly Wrong Test
Source Language
Malay/English
Succession and Estates Evidence Civil Procedure Small Estates (distribution) Act 1955 Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957 Admissibility of Public Records Fraud in Probate/distribution Proceedings Appellate Review Plainly Wrong Test

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Karpaya a/l Maliandy (by Ganesan a/l Karuppiah as attorney)

Appellant / Plaintiff

Kerisnan @ Krishnan a/l Malayaandy

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Judgment on Appeal From High Court (appeal Allowed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of Defendant's birth certificate (ID22) as court exhibit
  2. 2 Whether the Land Administrator's distribution order was obtained by fraud and liable to be set aside
  3. 3 Whether Defendant had locus to petition under SEDA 1955

Ratio Decidendi

ID22, a certified extract from the Register of Births issued under the BDRA 1957, was admissible and provided strong presumptive evidence that the respondent was not the deceased's son; viewing the evidence in totality the respondent obtained the Land Administrator's distribution order by fraudulent concealment and lacked locus to petition under SEDA 1955; consequently the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court decision and the distribution order and granted the appellant the reliefs sought in paragraph 18 of the amended statement of claim together with specified costs and ancillary orders.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside; distribution order set aside and reliefs in paragraph 18 of amended statement of claim granted.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and High Court decision set aside
  • Plaintiff's (Appellant's) reliefs in paragraph 18 of Amended Statement of Claim granted