MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD 1. ) KESWAN A/L R. RAJANTHARAN 2. ) MURUGIAH A/L SANGAPILLAY 3. ) RAJESWARY A/P SANGAPILLAY

MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD 1. ) KESWAN A/L R. RAJANTHARAN 2. ) MURUGIAH A/L SANGAPILLAY 3. ) RAJESWARY A/P SANGAPILLAY

The High Court held the Sessions Judge exercised his discretion judiciously in refusing leave to intervene because the application was made at the last minute without adequate factual support for fraud allegations and without satisfactory explanation for delay; therefore appellate intervention was unwarranted and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-12ANCvC-24-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/pemohon: MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD; Respondent: KESWAN A/L R. RAJANTHARAN; Respondent: MURUGIAH A/L SANGAPILLAY; Respondent: RAJESWARY A/P SANGAPILLAY
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Case Number
WA-12ANCvC-24-02/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Intervention, Order 15 Rule 6(2)(b)(ii), Order 34, Leave to Intervene, Delay and Abuse of Process, Fraud Allegation
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Motor Accident Intervention Order 15 Rule 6(2)(b)(ii) Order 34 Leave to Intervene Delay and Abuse of Process +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MSIG INSURANCE (MALAYSIA) BHD

Appellant/pemohon

KESWAN A/L R. RAJANTHARAN

Respondent

MURUGIAH A/L SANGAPILLAY

Respondent

RAJESWARY A/P SANGAPILLAY

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sessions Court / High Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave to intervene should be granted under Order 15 Rule 6(2)(b)(ii)
  2. 2 Whether the application was mala fide and filed to delay proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the Sessions Judge exercised judicial discretion properly and whether appellate interference is warranted

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the Sessions Judge exercised his discretion judiciously in refusing leave to intervene because the application was made at the last minute without adequate factual support for fraud allegations and without satisfactory explanation for delay; therefore appellate intervention was unwarranted and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellant to pay costs of RM3,000