HOCK JOO AUTO SUPPLY SDN. BHD. [Business Registration No.: 21583-K] 1. ) GUNALAN A/L CHANDRAKISAN BERNIAGA DI BAWAH NAMA DAN GAYA GK MAJU ENTERPRISE [Business Registration No.: IP0267098-M] 2. ) KRISHNA VENI A/P GANESON BERNIAGA DI BAWAH NA
The application to set aside the default judgment was dismissed because service by A.R. post was valid, the default judgment dated 2 January 2018 was regular, the First Defendant failed to establish a prima facie meritorious defence on the merits, and the application was made after an inordinate and unjustified delay (approx. 1 year 9 months).
- Citation
- AA-A72NCC-1568-12/2017 (Mahkamah Majistret)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: HOCK JOO AUTO SUPPLY SDN BHD; First Defendant: GUNALAN A/L CHANDRAKISAN trading as GK MAJU ENTERPRISE (IP0267098-M); Second Defendant: KRISHNA VENI A/P GANESON trading as GK MAJU ENTERPRISE (IP0267098-M)
- Court
- Magistrates' Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 13 January 2020
- Case Number
- AA-A72NCC-1568-12/2017 (Mahkamah Majistret)
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment Following Default Judgment and Execution Proceedings
- Outcome
- Application to set aside default judgment dismissed; default judgment upheld
- Legal Topics
- Set Aside Default Judgment, Service of Process, Abuse of Process, Prima Facie Meritorious Defence, Inordinate Delay, Execution and Sale (writ of Seizure and Sale)
- 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
HOCK JOO AUTO SUPPLY SDN BHD
Plaintiff
GUNALAN A/L CHANDRAKISAN trading as GK MAJU ENTERPRISE (IP0267098-M)
First Defendant
KRISHNA VENI A/P GANESON trading as GK MAJU ENTERPRISE (IP0267098-M)
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Application to Set Aside Default Judgment / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment Following Default Judgment and Execution Proceedings
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether service of the writ was valid and regular
- 2 Whether the default judgment was obtained irregularly or by abuse of process
- 3 Whether the First Defendant has a prima facie meritorious defence
Ratio Decidendi
The application to set aside the default judgment was dismissed because service by A.R. post was valid, the default judgment dated 2 January 2018 was regular, the First Defendant failed to establish a prima facie meritorious defence on the merits, and the application was made after an inordinate and unjustified delay (approx. 1 year 9 months).
Court Disposition
Application to set aside default judgment dismissed; default judgment upheld
Orders
- Application dismissed
- Default judgment dated 2 January 2018 is affirmed and remains enforceable
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