ABDUL KADER BIN ABDUL RAZAK 1. ) PATHMANATHAN A/L MUNIANDY @KRISHNAN 2. ) CREST PROPERTIES SDN BHD 3. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI SELANGOR 4. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 5. ) Salinah Binti Abdul Kader (D2 Dalam Tuntutan Balas) 6. )

ABDUL KADER BIN ABDUL RAZAK 1. ) PATHMANATHAN A/L MUNIANDY @KRISHNAN 2. ) CREST PROPERTIES SDN BHD 3. ) PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI SELANGOR 4. ) PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN SELANGOR 5. ) Salinah Binti Abdul Kader (D2 Dalam Tuntutan Balas) 6. )

The court held that the Unless Order made at the pre-trial CM was clear and non-compliance by the Plaintiff and his solicitors was not minor; medical evidence was insufficient to excuse non-compliance; striking out under O.34 r.2(3) was correctly enforced and the application to set aside under O.34 r.2(4) failed, therefore the Striking Out Order is maintained but Plaintiff is granted liberty to file afresh.

Citation
WA-22NCvC-656-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (original); Plaintiff and Plaintiff in Counterclaim to the Counterclaim: ABDUL KADER BIN ABDUL RAZAK; 1st Defendant (original); Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim): PATHMANATHAN A/L MUNIANDY @ KRISHNAN; 2nd Defendant (original); Plaintiff (counterclaim): CREST PROPERTIES SDN BHD; 3rd Defendant (original); Nominal Defendant: PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI SELANGOR; 4th Defendant (original); Nominal Defendant: PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN NEGERI SELANGOR; Defendant (counterclaim); Plaintiff (counterclaim to the Counterclaim): SALINAH BINTI ABDUL KADER; Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim): HARMIZA SARY BINTI ABDUL HAMID; Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim): MURALI A/L V RAJARAM
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 February 2025
Case Number
WA-22NCvC-656-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Application to Set Aside Striking Out Order Under Rules of Court 2012 / Post Case Management Application Decided (application Dismissed; Full Grounds of Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed; Striking Out Order of 5.11.2024 maintained; Plaintiff granted liberty to file afresh; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Striking Out, Case Management, Unless Order, Set Aside Order, Pre Trial Directions, Lien/caveat, Fraud and Forgery, Conspiracy
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Property Law Contract Fraud Equity Striking Out Case Management Unless Order +5 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABDUL KADER BIN ABDUL RAZAK

Plaintiff (original); Plaintiff and Plaintiff in Counterclaim to the Counterclaim

PATHMANATHAN A/L MUNIANDY @ KRISHNAN

1st Defendant (original); Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim)

CREST PROPERTIES SDN BHD

2nd Defendant (original); Plaintiff (counterclaim)

PENDAFTAR HAKMILIK NEGERI SELANGOR

3rd Defendant (original); Nominal Defendant

PENGARAH TANAH DAN GALIAN NEGERI SELANGOR

4th Defendant (original); Nominal Defendant

SALINAH BINTI ABDUL KADER

Defendant (counterclaim); Plaintiff (counterclaim to the Counterclaim)

HARMIZA SARY BINTI ABDUL HAMID

Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim)

MURALI A/L V RAJARAM

Defendant (counterclaim to the Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Civil Application to Set Aside Striking Out Order Under Rules of Court 2012 / Post Case Management Application Decided (application Dismissed; Full Grounds of Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has power to set aside its own striking out order under O.34 r.2(4) RC 2012
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiffs' non-compliance with pre-trial case management directions justified striking out under O.34 r.2(3) RC 2012
  3. 3 Whether the Plaintiff's medical condition or financial constraints justified reinstatement of the suit

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Unless Order made at the pre-trial CM was clear and non-compliance by the Plaintiff and his solicitors was not minor; medical evidence was insufficient to excuse non-compliance; striking out under O.34 r.2(3) was correctly enforced and the application to set aside under O.34 r.2(4) failed, therefore the Striking Out Order is maintained but Plaintiff is granted liberty to file afresh.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Striking Out Order of 5.11.2024 maintained; Plaintiff granted liberty to file afresh; no order as to costs

Orders

  • Application in encl. 97 dismissed
  • Striking Out Order dated 5.11.2024 upheld