Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Allegations of fraud

Legal area

Court

6 May 2024

1 SECURITY SERVICES SDN BHD BESTCOMP PLANTATION SDN. BHD.

Citation

NA-24NCvC-396-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

NA-24NCvC-396-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants did not demonstrate a registrable interest in the land under s 323 NLC because allegations of unpaid balance at best amount to a contractual right which is not a registrable interest; defendants also failed to commence prompt substantive proceedings and unreasonably delayed (several years), thereby prejudicing the registered proprietor. Therefore the private caveat was unjustified and must be set aside with costs.
21 Dec 2023

YUGANES NAIDU A/L SANNASEE NAIDU 1. ) DORAI RAJOO A/L DORAISAMY 2. ) GEETHA A/P SANNASI PENCELAH ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (M) BERHAD

Citation

BE-A73KJ-42-11/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BE-A73KJ-42-11/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The application to intervene was dismissed because the applicant filed it inordinately late after the plaintiff had given evidence, failed to obtain permission and comply with case management directions for a late additional affidavit, and failed to demonstrate a bona fide, timely prima facie case of fraud; although the insurer has legal and financial interest under Order 15 Rule 6 KKM 2012 and Section 96 RTA 1987, those factors did not justify intervention given delay, non-compliance and lack of credible supporting evidence.
14 Sept 2022

1. ) FAHMI AIMAN BIN MD. HASRONI 2. ) FAZRUL AZRI BIN MD. HASRONI 3. ) XXXX 4. ) NORHAIZAN BINTI OMAR ISMAIL BIN SALLEH

Citation

JA-A53KJ-48-01/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

JA-A53KJ-48-01/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Application to intervene was dismissed because the Notice of Application and supporting affidavit failed to specify the legal provision relied upon, rendering the application fundamentally defective, and because the applicant unreasonably delayed seeking intervention without satisfactory explanation; exercise of discretion refused despite applicant having a legal/pecuniary interest.
22 Apr 2021

IMS MOTORSPORT SDN BHD FULL LINE COMMUNICATIONS SDN BHD

Citation

BL-11A-2-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-11A-2-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Claim dismissed: claimant failed to produce the invoiced document dated 25.2.2014 that formed the basis of the claim; the only proved invoice is dated 23.4.2013 which was paid and any action based on that or later alleged invoice was filed beyond the six‑year limitation period under s6(1) Limitation Act 1953; therefore the magistrate rightly struck out the action under Order 18 Rule 19 as time‑barred, frivolous and an abuse of process and the appellate court affirmed that decision.

Malaysia Case Law

1 SECURITY SERVICES SDN BHD BESTCOMP PLANTATION SDN. BHD.

YUGANES NAIDU A/L SANNASEE NAIDU 1. ) DORAI RAJOO A/L DORAISAMY 2. ) GEETHA A/P SANNASI PENCELAH ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (M) BERHAD

1. ) FAHMI AIMAN BIN MD. HASRONI 2. ) FAZRUL AZRI BIN MD. HASRONI 3. ) XXXX 4. ) NORHAIZAN BINTI OMAR ISMAIL BIN SALLEH

IMS MOTORSPORT SDN BHD FULL LINE COMMUNICATIONS SDN BHD