Shalina binti Saman 1. ) Mohamad Amin bin Zakaria 2. ) Suriani binti Basah

Shalina binti Saman 1. ) Mohamad Amin bin Zakaria 2. ) Suriani binti Basah

The court found the plaintiff had validly served the writ and statement of claim and met the requirements for judgment in default under Order 19 r.7; the defendants' delay in entering appearance and filing defence was inordinate, not satisfactorily explained by PKP, and their asserted defences appeared to be afterthoughts; accordingly the defendants' application for extension of time was refused and the plaintiff's application for judgment in default was allowed. Costs of RM2,000 were ordered against the defendants for each application as stated.

Citation
KA-22NCVC-12-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff: Shalina binti Saman; Defendant 1: Mohamad Amin bin Zakaria; Defendant 2: Suriani binti Basah
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 December 2020
Case Number
KA-22NCVC-12-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit Specific Performance and Damages / Interlocutory Applications: Application for Default Judgment (order 19 R.7) and Application for Extension of Time to File Defence (order 19)
Outcome
Plaintiff's application for judgment in default (Lampiran 5) allowed; Defendants' application for extension of time to file defence (Lampiran 12) dismissed.
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Extension of Time to File Defence, Service of Writ, Specific Performance, Mortgage Redemption
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Property Equity Default Judgment Extension of Time to File Defence Service of Writ Specific Performance +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shalina binti Saman

Plaintiff

Mohamad Amin bin Zakaria

Defendant 1

Suriani binti Basah

Defendant 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit Specific Performance and Damages / Interlocutory Applications: Application for Default Judgment (order 19 R.7) and Application for Extension of Time to File Defence (order 19)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether plaintiff complied with service requirements so as to obtain judgment in default under Order 19 r.7
  2. 2 Whether defendants ought to be granted extension of time to file a defence
  3. 3 Whether Covid-19 Movement Control Order (PKP) justified defendants' delay

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the plaintiff had validly served the writ and statement of claim and met the requirements for judgment in default under Order 19 r.7; the defendants' delay in entering appearance and filing defence was inordinate, not satisfactorily explained by PKP, and their asserted defences appeared to be afterthoughts; accordingly the defendants' application for extension of time was refused and the plaintiff's application for judgment in default was allowed. Costs of RM2,000 were ordered against the defendants for each application as stated.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application for judgment in default (Lampiran 5) allowed; Defendants' application for extension of time to file defence (Lampiran 12) dismissed.

Orders

  • Lampiran 5 allowed: judgment in default permitted; costs awarded RM2,000 to plaintiff.
  • Lampiran 12 dismissed: application for extension of time refused; costs awarded RM2,000.