PREMALA A/P THRIUGNANNASAMBANDHAN 1. ) SUNDARA RAJAN A/L SHANMUGAM 2. ) SIVAKUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM

PREMALA A/P THRIUGNANNASAMBANDHAN 1. ) SUNDARA RAJAN A/L SHANMUGAM 2. ) SIVAKUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM

The plaintiff repeatedly instituted and pursued proceedings grounded on a will that had been finally declared invalid on appeal, with full knowledge and legal representation; that conduct satisfied the statutory test for habitual, persistent and unreasonable institution of vexatious proceedings under paragraph 17 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964; accordingly the counterclaim was allowed, a restraint order was necessary to prevent further abuse, and costs were awarded to the defendants.

Citation
BL-22NCVC-12-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Plaintiff (next of Friend to Ajendran A/l Sundara Rajan): PREMALA A/P THRIUGNANNASAMBANDHAN; Defendant 1: SUNDARA RAJAN A/L SHANMUGAM; Defendant 2: SIVAKUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 December 2021
Case Number
BL-22NCVC-12-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil (probate) / Final Judgment on Counterclaim
Outcome
Counterclaim allowed. Plaintiff declared a vexatious litigant and restrained from instituting proceedings relating to the deceased's estate without the leave of the Court; costs awarded to defendants.
Legal Topics
Vexatious Litigant, Restraint on Proceedings, Declaration, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Probate and Administration Litigation Conduct Vexatious Litigant Restraint on Proceedings Declaration Costs

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PREMALA A/P THRIUGNANNASAMBANDHAN

Plaintiff (next of Friend to Ajendran A/l Sundara Rajan)

SUNDARA RAJAN A/L SHANMUGAM

Defendant 1

SIVAKUMAR A/L SHANMUGAM

Defendant 2

Procedural Posture

Civil (probate) / Final Judgment on Counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant under paragraph 17 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964
  2. 2 Whether the court should restrain the plaintiff from instituting proceedings relating to the deceased's estate without leave
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff repeatedly instituted and pursued proceedings grounded on a will that had been finally declared invalid on appeal, with full knowledge and legal representation; that conduct satisfied the statutory test for habitual, persistent and unreasonable institution of vexatious proceedings under paragraph 17 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964; accordingly the counterclaim was allowed, a restraint order was necessary to prevent further abuse, and costs were awarded to the defendants.

Court Disposition

Counterclaim allowed. Plaintiff declared a vexatious litigant and restrained from instituting proceedings relating to the deceased's estate without the leave of the Court; costs awarded to defendants.

Orders

  • Plaintiff is declared a vexatious litigant pursuant to paragraph 17 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964
  • Plaintiff is prohibited from instituting any legal proceedings against the defendants premised on the deceased's will without leave of the Court