Kerajaan Malaysia 1. ) ISUARAN A/L ANTHONYSAMY 2. ) ANNALETCHEMY A/P RAJAGOPAL

Kerajaan Malaysia 1. ) ISUARAN A/L ANTHONYSAMY 2. ) ANNALETCHEMY A/P RAJAGOPAL

Because sub‑rule (2A) of Aturan 6 Kaedah 7 KKM 2012 mandates that an application for renewal of a writ be made before expiry and the court cannot allow a general remedial provision to supersede a mandatory rule, a renewal application filed after expiry (and in this case seven months after expiry) must be refused; therefore Lampiran 19 was dismissed and no extension granted.

Citation
PA-A71KJ-6-08/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Plaintif: Kerajaan Malaysia; Defendan: Isuaran A/L Anthonysamy; Defendan: Annaletchemy A/P Rajagopal
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 September 2022
Case Number
PA-A71KJ-6-08/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Civil Application to Extend Writ Validity / Appeal Against Refusal of Renewal Application (lampiran 19)
Outcome
Lampiran 19 (application to renew/extend validity of writ) dismissed; no extension of the writ granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Writ Validity, Service of Writ, Compliance With Procedural Rules, O.1 A/remedial Discretion Vs Mandatory Rules
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Court Rules Magistrates' Court Practice Extension of Writ Validity Service of Writ Compliance With Procedural Rules O.1 A/remedial Discretion Vs Mandatory Rules

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerajaan Malaysia

Plaintif

Isuaran A/L Anthonysamy

Defendan

Annaletchemy A/P Rajagopal

Defendan

Procedural Posture

Civil Application to Extend Writ Validity / Appeal Against Refusal of Renewal Application (lampiran 19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application to renew/extend the validity of a writ filed after expiry can be granted
  2. 2 Whether the court may invoke a general remedial provision to cure non-compliance with a mandatory rule requiring application before expiry
  3. 3 Whether excessive delay in filing the renewal application warrants refusal

Ratio Decidendi

Because sub‑rule (2A) of Aturan 6 Kaedah 7 KKM 2012 mandates that an application for renewal of a writ be made before expiry and the court cannot allow a general remedial provision to supersede a mandatory rule, a renewal application filed after expiry (and in this case seven months after expiry) must be refused; therefore Lampiran 19 was dismissed and no extension granted.

Court Disposition

Lampiran 19 (application to renew/extend validity of writ) dismissed; no extension of the writ granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Lampiran 19 dismissed
  • No extension of writ validity granted