1. ) VITAL LIVING EMPIRE SDN BHD 2. ) SASHITHERAN A/L KANAGASABAPATHI 3. ) VIGNESWARAN A/L AH WALI ELEGANT GROUP SDN BHD

1. ) VITAL LIVING EMPIRE SDN BHD 2. ) SASHITHERAN A/L KANAGASABAPATHI 3. ) VIGNESWARAN A/L AH WALI ELEGANT GROUP SDN BHD

The High Court held the Sessions Court was plainly wrong to order summary judgment because the Plaintiffs had pleaded fraud/misrepresentation and contested formation of a Second Contract (LGI) which raised genuine triable issues that could not be resolved summarily, and therefore the counterclaim required full trial; failure to file an opposing affidavit did not negate the sufficiency of the pleadings to raise triable issues.

Citation
WA-12ANCvC-16-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: VITAL LIVING EMPIRE SDN BHD; Appellant / Plaintiff: SASHITHERAN A/L ANAGASABAPATHI; Appellant / Plaintiff: VIGNESWARAN A/L AH WALI; Respondent / Defendant: ELEGANT GROUP SDN BHD; Defendant: SATIS KUMAR; Defendant: NGEOW CHOW YING; Defendant: YEW DING WEI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 July 2025
Case Number
WA-12ANCvC-16-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in High Court (re Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Sessions Court summary judgment set aside; matter remitted to the Sessions Court for trial before a different Judge.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (o.14 RC 2012), Counterclaim, Variation of Contract, Guarantee and Indemnity, Holding Over, Striking Out, Triable Issue
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Civil Procedure Landlord and Tenant Fraud / Misrepresentation Summary Judgment (o.14 RC 2012) Counterclaim Variation of Contract Guarantee and Indemnity +3 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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

VITAL LIVING EMPIRE SDN BHD

Appellant / Plaintiff

SASHITHERAN A/L ANAGASABAPATHI

Appellant / Plaintiff

VIGNESWARAN A/L AH WALI

Appellant / Plaintiff

ELEGANT GROUP SDN BHD

Respondent / Defendant

SATIS KUMAR

Defendant

NGEOW CHOW YING

Defendant

YEW DING WEI

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in High Court (re Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court erred in entering summary judgment on the counterclaim under O.14 r.5 RC 2012
  2. 2 Whether pleaded fraud/fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation raises triable issues precluding summary judgment
  3. 3 Whether a Second Contract (variation/settlement) existed despite Clause 9 requiring written variation

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the Sessions Court was plainly wrong to order summary judgment because the Plaintiffs had pleaded fraud/misrepresentation and contested formation of a Second Contract (LGI) which raised genuine triable issues that could not be resolved summarily, and therefore the counterclaim required full trial; failure to file an opposing affidavit did not negate the sufficiency of the pleadings to raise triable issues.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Sessions Court summary judgment set aside; matter remitted to the Sessions Court for trial before a different Judge.

Orders

  • Summary judgment obtained by the Sessions Court in favour of D1 set aside and the counterclaim remitted to the Sessions Court to be heard before a different Judge
  • Appeal allowed with costs to the Appellants in the sum of RM5,000.00, subject to allocatur