Michal Beranek v Sreerangam Muruthi & 2 Ors

Michal Beranek v Sreerangam Muruthi & 2 Ors

Service of originating process establishes the court’s in personam jurisdiction only if the defendant is served while present in Singapore or if service outside Singapore is effected in circumstances authorised by the Rules of Court; the critical test is the defendant’s presence at the time of service. Where the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2026] SGHCR 10
Parties
Applicant: Michal Beranek; First Respondent: Sreerangam Muruthi; Second Respondent: Rasheed Thaiyar Mohamed; Third Respondent: LSCS Pte Ltd
Court
High Court Registrar
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
6 April 2026
Case Number
HC/OA 1158/2025 ( HC/SUM 3759/2025 )
Procedural Posture
Originating Application (statutory Derivative Action) / Interlocutory — Application to Set Aside Substituted Service and Service Effected Thereunder
Outcome
Allowed first respondent’s application. Order for substituted service set aside and substituted service effected pursuant to it set aside; costs awarded to first respondent on indemnity basis
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Substituted Service, Service Out of Jurisdiction, Jurisdiction, Material Non Disclosure, Without Notice Applications, Costs — Indemnity
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Conflict of Laws Company Law Service of Process Substituted Service Service Out of Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Material Non Disclosure +2 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michal Beranek

Applicant

Sreerangam Muruthi

First Respondent

Rasheed Thaiyar Mohamed

Second Respondent

LSCS Pte Ltd

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Originating Application (statutory Derivative Action) / Interlocutory — Application to Set Aside Substituted Service and Service Effected Thereunder

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether service of originating process on a defendant outside Singapore requires permission to serve out of the jurisdiction or can be effected by substituted service without such permission
  2. 2 Whether the touchstone for service within or outside the jurisdiction is the defendant’s presence in Singapore at the time of service
  3. 3 Relationship and order between service out of the jurisdiction and substituted service

Ratio Decidendi

Service of originating process establishes the court’s in personam jurisdiction only if the defendant is served while present in Singapore or if service outside Singapore is effected in circumstances authorised by the Rules of Court; the critical test is the defendant’s presence at the time of service. Where the defendant was outside Singapore at the time of substituted service and the claimant had not obtained permission to serve out of the jurisdiction, service was irregular and must be set aside. Separately, the applicant’s deliberate material non-disclosure in the without‑notice substituted service application justified setting aside the substituted service order and awarding...

Court Disposition

Allowed first respondent’s application. Order for substituted service set aside and substituted service effected pursuant to it set aside; costs awarded to first respondent on indemnity basis

Orders

  • Order for substituted service made in HC/SUM 3260/2025 set aside
  • Service effected on 20 November 2025 pursuant to the substituted service order set aside