PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD RATHA A/L VADEVELO

PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD RATHA A/L VADEVELO

No bona fide triable issues existed to defeat summary judgment: the loan amount and terms were clearly documented and chosen by the Appellant; misrepresentation and non est factum were not established and, where benefits of the contract had been received and registration effected, the Appellant could not avoid the agreement belatedly; false supporting documents did not create a defence to repayment; disputes over stakeholder releases were matters between the vendor, solicitors and third parties and did not make the bank vicariously liable. Summary judgment was therefore properly granted and upheld on appeal.

Citation
PA-12AM-3-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Perayu: RATHA A/P VADEVELO; Respondent / Plaintiff: PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD; 2nd Plaintiff (counter Claim): MURALI A/L NADARAJAH; 2nd Defendant (counter Claim): SOLOMON AJL DAVID; 3rd Defendant (counter Claim) Solicitors: TETUAN MAY CHAN EIZA & CO; 4th Defendant (counter Claim): GOH AH THIAM
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
1 January 1900
Case Number
PA-12AM-3-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (summary Judgment) / High Court Appeal Heard and Dismissed (appeal From Sessions Court Summary Judgment)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; summary judgment against the Appellant upheld
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Misrepresentation, Non Est Factum, Stakeholder/solicitor Duties, Vicarious Liability, Counter Claim
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Banking Civil Procedure Property Tort Vicarious Liability Summary Judgment Misrepresentation Non Est Factum +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RATHA A/P VADEVELO

Appellant / Perayu

PUBLIC ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD

Respondent / Plaintiff

MURALI A/L NADARAJAH

2nd Plaintiff (counter Claim)

SOLOMON AJL DAVID

2nd Defendant (counter Claim)

TETUAN MAY CHAN EIZA & CO

3rd Defendant (counter Claim) Solicitors

GOH AH THIAM

4th Defendant (counter Claim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court (summary Judgment) / High Court Appeal Heard and Dismissed (appeal From Sessions Court Summary Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether triable issues exist to defeat summary judgment on alleged misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether non est factum defence is made out
  3. 3 Whether false supporting documents raise triable issues

Ratio Decidendi

No bona fide triable issues existed to defeat summary judgment: the loan amount and terms were clearly documented and chosen by the Appellant; misrepresentation and non est factum were not established and, where benefits of the contract had been received and registration effected, the Appellant could not avoid the agreement belatedly; false supporting documents did not create a defence to repayment; disputes over stakeholder releases were matters between the vendor, solicitors and third parties and did not make the bank vicariously liable. Summary judgment was therefore properly granted and upheld on appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; summary judgment against the Appellant upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Summary judgment granted to Respondent Public Islamic Bank Berhad upheld