[25] In the case of Tetuan Kumar, Jaspal, Quah & Aishah v. Far Legion Sdn Bhd, [2003] 6 MLJ 95, the Court said:

"... a case is not suitable for summary determination pursuant to Order 14, if the Affidavit contains contradictory evidence which cannot be resolved except by trial."

[26] In the case of Bank Negara Malaysia v. Mohd Ismail & Ors, 1992 MarsdenLR 798 ; [1992] 1 CLJ Rep 14; [1992] 1 CLJ 627, the Supreme Court said:

"The determination of whether an issue is or is not triable must necessarily depend on the facts or the law arising from each case as disclosed in the affidavit evidence before the Court".

D. Analysis And Finding Of This Court

Order 14, Rule 1 Has Been Met By The Plaintiffs

[27] After perusing the cause papers, this Court agreed with the Plaintiff that the basic requirements of O 14, r 1 of the Rules of 2012, to enter summary judgment have been met, in the sense that the Amended Statemen