Prem Kumar A/L Selvaedran Bambull Sdn. Bhd.

Prem Kumar A/L Selvaedran Bambull Sdn. Bhd.

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court summary judgment because Respondent established a prima facie case of default and breach, provided documentary evidence and admissions, and the Appellant failed to identify any bona fide triable issue; therefore Respondent was entitled to outstanding rent, utilities, repair costs, forfeiture of deposits under the tenancy clause and double rent under s28(4)(a) Civil Law Act 1956; appeal dismissed with costs RM5,000.

Citation
BL-12ANCvC-2-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: PREM KUMAR A/L SELVAEDRAN; Respondent: BAMBULL SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 June 2023
Case Number
BL-12ANCvC-2-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court Decision on Summary Judgment Under Order 14 ROC 2012
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court order granting summary judgment affirmed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Forfeiture of Deposit, Double Rent, Breach of Tenancy, Notice to Quit, Restoration of Premises, Orders of Court
Source Language
Malay/English
Tenancy Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Landlord Tenant Law Commercial Law Summary Judgment Forfeiture of Deposit Double Rent +4 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PREM KUMAR A/L SELVAEDRAN

Appellant

BAMBULL SDN BHD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court Decision on Summary Judgment Under Order 14 ROC 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there were triable issues to defeat a summary judgment under Order 14 ROC 2012
  2. 2 Whether the tenant breached tenancy terms (clauses 2(g), 2(h), 2(k))
  3. 3 Entitlement of landlord to double rent under Section 28(4)(a) Civil Law Act 1956

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court summary judgment because Respondent established a prima facie case of default and breach, provided documentary evidence and admissions, and the Appellant failed to identify any bona fide triable issue; therefore Respondent was entitled to outstanding rent, utilities, repair costs, forfeiture of deposits under the tenancy clause and double rent under s28(4)(a) Civil Law Act 1956; appeal dismissed with costs RM5,000.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court order granting summary judgment affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Summary judgment of the Sessions Court allowing Respondent's Order 14 application affirmed