PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO. BERHAD 1. ) JEYA PRAKASH A/L ARASAN 2. ) GUNALAN A/L PECHIMUTU

PACIFIC & ORIENT INSURANCE CO. BERHAD 1. ) JEYA PRAKASH A/L ARASAN 2. ) GUNALAN A/L PECHIMUTU

The High Court allowed D2's appeal: D2 had the right to intervene and to apply to set aside the judgment because of its statutory interest under s96(1) RTA; the setting aside application was not fatally defective and any technical non-compliance did not prejudice parties; D2 had produced prima facie evidence of fraud and conspiracy warranting a trial; accordingly the default judgment was set aside and the matter remitted to the Sessions Court for a full hearing, with costs awarded to D2.

Citation
JA-12A-6-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Second Defendant: Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Berhad; Respondent / Plaintiff: Gunalan A/L Pechimutu; Respondent / First Defendant: Jeya Prakash A/L Arasan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
6 December 2023
Case Number
JA-12A-6-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (appeal From Sessions Court Concerning Setting Aside Default Judgment) / High Court Appellate Decision (judgment on Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Intervention by Insurer, Statutory Liability of Insurer (s96 Rta), Fraud and Conspiracy, Order 1 a ROC Overriding Interest of Justice, Service and Delay
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Tort (negligence) Contract Law Evidence Law Statutory Interpretation Setting Aside Default Judgment Intervention by Insurer +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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pacific & Orient Insurance Co Berhad

Appellant / Second Defendant

Gunalan A/L Pechimutu

Respondent / Plaintiff

Jeya Prakash A/L Arasan

Respondent / First Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (appeal From Sessions Court Concerning Setting Aside Default Judgment) / High Court Appellate Decision (judgment on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether insurer (D2) has locus to apply to set aside default judgment obtained in Sessions Court
  2. 2 Whether the setting aside application was fatally defective for not citing statutory provision
  3. 3 Whether there is prima facie evidence of fraud and conspiracy vitiating the 2015 suit

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed D2's appeal: D2 had the right to intervene and to apply to set aside the judgment because of its statutory interest under s96(1) RTA; the setting aside application was not fatally defective and any technical non-compliance did not prejudice parties; D2 had produced prima facie evidence of fraud and conspiracy warranting a trial; accordingly the default judgment was set aside and the matter remitted to the Sessions Court for a full hearing, with costs awarded to D2.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Default judgment dated 29/03/2017 set aside
  • Civil suit (Johor Bahru Sessions Court Civil Suit No A53KJ-894-10/2015) remitted to the Sessions Court to be heard on its merits