SURENDRAN JAYA SEELAN vs MUHAMMAD AIZAT MOHD SANI

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 MarsdenLR 484

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
SURENDRAN JAYA SEELAN – Appellant
Versus
MUHAMMAD AIZAT MOHD SANI – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Umesh Skanthan Vijayakumar ,Respondent Advocate: Patwant Singh Sohanpal

Table of Content
1. the plaintiff's entitlement to damages for past claims rests on clear liability. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 10)
2. appellate interference is warranted when errors in law or misapprehensions arise. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. special damages require justifiable claims with appropriate assessments to prevent excess. (Para 12 , 14 , 16 , 19)
4. prior successful claims set precedence, guiding the quantum of awards. (Para 31 , 33)

Tee Geok Hock J:

Introduction

[1] The Sessions Court held that the Plaintiff-pillion rider was entitled to recover 100% from the Defendant/Surendran (the rider of a motorbike which collided with another motorbike) for negligence in causing a road accident and that the Defendant was entitled to recover 50% from the Third Parties (including Umar Ardi, the rider of the other motorbike in the collision), and then awarded various heads of damages in favour of the Plaintiff/Muhammad Aizat.

[2] Dissatisfied with the said decision, the Defendant has appealed to this Court on liability and quantum issues.

[3] By way of written letter dated 7 November 2022 (Enclosure 23), the Appellant/Defendant's counsel has confirmed that the Appellant/Defendant did not pursue the liability

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 MarsdenLR 484

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAMSURENDRAN JAYA SEELAN – AppellantVersusMUHAMMAD AIZAT MOHD SANI – Respondent

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
SURENDRAN JAYA SEELAN – Appellant
Versus
MUHAMMAD AIZAT MOHD SANI – Respondent