30 Apr 2024
1. ) ANNA CHOCKALINGAM 2. ) THIAGARAJAN KASIVISWANATHAN 3. ) VASANTHAL ACHI SETHU 4. ) RAMANATHAN MEENAKSHI-SUNDARAM 5. ) ANGAPPAN A/L RAMASAMY CHETTIAR 6. ) AR. MYTHILI W/O SP ARUNACHALAM 7. ) A. MEENAKSHI @ KALPANA W/O RM. ANNAMALAI 8. )
- Citation
- JA-24NCvC-387-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Court
- High Court
- Case number
- JA-24NCvC-387-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Plaintiffs satisfied s.145(1) NLC because co-proprietors did not consent and partition was impracticable; administrators and beneficiaries had locus standi by virtue of letters of administration and a consent judgment; existing SPA was conditional and incomplete and did not bar the court from ordering termination and sale; D8 was bound by the prior consent judgment and cannot relitigate claims to the 5/16 share; accordingly the originating summons was allowed and the court ordered termination and sale with consequential directions and costs as determined.