JAGJIT SINGH A/L PRITAM SINGH 1. ) MASYATI BINTI ABANG IBRAHIM (SEBAGAI PENDAFTAR PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA) 2. ) MOHAMAD AZHAR BIN FADZIYA (SEBAGAI PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA NEGERI KEDAH) 3. ) JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHA

JAGJIT SINGH A/L PRITAM SINGH 1. ) MASYATI BINTI ABANG IBRAHIM (SEBAGAI PENDAFTAR PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA) 2. ) MOHAMAD AZHAR BIN FADZIYA (SEBAGAI PENGARAH JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA NEGERI KEDAH) 3. ) JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHA

Order 32 r.13(2) KKM 2012 is mandatory; interveners failed to file affidavits within 14 days after permission to intervene and offered no cogent, timely or credible reasons (pandemic/e‑filing availability and possession of documents negated excuses); delay was inordinate and possibly mala fide; discretion to extend refused and the extension application (Lampiran 75) dismissed with costs RM1,000 each.

Citation
KA-25-3-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: JAGJIT SINGH A/L PRITAM SINGH; Respondent 1: MASYATI BINTI ABANG IBRAHIM; Respondent 2: MOHAMAD AZHAR BIN FADZIYA; Respondent 3: JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA; Respondent 4: DATO' PADUKA AMMAR BIN DATO' SHAIKH MAHMOOD NAIM; Respondent 5: KERAJAAN NEGERI KEDAH DARUL AMAN; Intervener 1: HANG KOK LONG; Intervener 2: DIBAGARAN A/L KUNJOO RAMAN; Intervener 3: MOHD AMIN BIN RAMLI; Intervener 4: OTHMAN BIN WAN CHIK; Intervener 5: MOHD BADRON BIN SHAFIE; Intervener 6: HAMZAH BIN JAFAR
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 December 2021
Case Number
KA-25-3-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (permohonan Semakan Kehakiman) / Interlocutory — Application for Extension of Time to File Affidavits (notice of Application Lampiran 75)
Outcome
Application for extension of time (Lampiran 75) dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Order 32 R.13(2) — Affidavits in Reply, Intervention, E‑filing and Pandemic Operational Issues, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Administrative Law Judicial Review Extension of Time Order 32 R.13(2) — Affidavits in Reply Intervention E‑filing and Pandemic Operational Issues Costs

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JAGJIT SINGH A/L PRITAM SINGH

Applicant

MASYATI BINTI ABANG IBRAHIM

Respondent 1

MOHAMAD AZHAR BIN FADZIYA

Respondent 2

JABATAN PENDAFTARAN PERTUBUHAN MALAYSIA

Respondent 3

DATO' PADUKA AMMAR BIN DATO' SHAIKH MAHMOOD NAIM

Respondent 4

KERAJAAN NEGERI KEDAH DARUL AMAN

Respondent 5

HANG KOK LONG

Intervener 1

DIBAGARAN A/L KUNJOO RAMAN

Intervener 2

MOHD AMIN BIN RAMLI

Intervener 3

OTHMAN BIN WAN CHIK

Intervener 4

MOHD BADRON BIN SHAFIE

Intervener 5

HAMZAH BIN JAFAR

Intervener 6

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (permohonan Semakan Kehakiman) / Interlocutory — Application for Extension of Time to File Affidavits (notice of Application Lampiran 75)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interveners were entitled to an extension of time to file affidavits in reply
  2. 2 Whether Order 32 r.13(2) Kaedah‑Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 is mandatory and non‑curable by O.1A/O.2
  3. 3 Whether Covid‑19 Movement Control Order justified the delay

Ratio Decidendi

Order 32 r.13(2) KKM 2012 is mandatory; interveners failed to file affidavits within 14 days after permission to intervene and offered no cogent, timely or credible reasons (pandemic/e‑filing availability and possession of documents negated excuses); delay was inordinate and possibly mala fide; discretion to extend refused and the extension application (Lampiran 75) dismissed with costs RM1,000 each.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time (Lampiran 75) dismissed.

Orders

  • Lampiran 75 dismissed
  • Costs awarded: RM1,000.00 for each intervener (Pencelah)