The Plaintiff lacked locus standi to initiate action regarding the deceased's estate due to the removal of her late husband's name from the beneficiaries list, leading to the application being allowed without a full trial.

JUDGMENT

Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin JC:

Introduction

[1] The parties will be referred to as they were in the High Court. The Defendants on 25 October 2023 filed an application in Encl 9 under O 14A and/or O 33 r 5 of the Rules of 2012 (ROC 2012). This Court allowed the application on 29 April 2024 with costs. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal on 24 May 2024. The Court now gives its reasons for allowing the application in this Grounds of Judgment.

Background

[2] On 25 September 2020, the Plaintiff had filed a civil suit No: AB-22NCvC-15-09/2020 against the 1st and 2nd Defendants in this suit (hereinafter referred to as Suit No 1). However, on 14 March 2023, the Plaintiff withdrew the action against them and the Court struck out Suit No 1 with liberty to refile. The Plaintiff made the decision because there were objections to the Plaintiff's application to amend the Writ and Statement of Claim in Suit No 1 to include the names of the 3rd and 4th Defendants in this suit. The Defendants in Suit No 1 objected to the application on the grounds that the amendments were substantive and would change the character of the suit into another and that the Plaintiff attempted to introduce new causes of action which were not pleaded in its pleadings.

[3] Then, on 8 August 2023, the Plaintiff filed the present action against the 4 Defendants named above. Needless to say, the reliefs prayed for in both actions were almost similar. In Suit No 1, the Court had dismissed the Defendants' application to strike out the case, amongst others, on the reason that the mere fact that the pleading was "weak and not likely to succeed" was not a ground to strike out a pleading.

[4] The Defendants in the application in Encl 9 made under O 14A in the present suit had posed the following question of a legal nature to the Court for its determination:

(a) Bahawa kebenaran diberikan kepada Defendan-Defendan untuk memfailkan permohonan ini;

(b) Bahawa Defendan-Defendan memohon supaya Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini mendengar dan memutuskan persoalan undang-undang berikut tanpa satu perbicaraan penuh ke atas tuntutan yang difailkan oleh Plaintif terhadap Defendan-Defendan ini:

(i) Sama ada Plaintif mempunyai hak di bawah undang-undang dan/atau locus standi ke atas Harta Pusaka Khor Kiok Seng (Si Mati) untuk memulakan tindakan Plaintif di bawah Writ Saman dan Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif yang kedua-duanya bertarikh 8 Ogos 2023 ini terhadap Defendan-Defendan;

(c) Bahawa sekiranya persoalan undang-undang yang tersebut di atas diputuskan oleh Mahkamah memihak kepada pihak Defendan-Defendan maka Defendan-Defendan memohon supaya tuntutan Plaintif di bawah Writ Saman dan Pernyataan Tuntutan Plaintif yang kedua-duanya bertarikh 8 Ogos 2023 ditolak dengan kos;

(d) Kos adalah diberikan atas dasar kos indemniti; dan

(e) Relif-relif dan/atau perintah-perintah lain yang difikirkan suaimanfaat oleh Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini.

[5] The basis for the Defendants' application in Encl 9, amongst others, were stated as follows:

1. Bahawa Plaintif memulakan tindakan ini terhadap Defendan-Defendan mendakwa sebagai Pentadbir dan benefisiari bagi Harta Pusaka Khor Kim Joo (Si Mati).

2. Bahawa Plaintif memulakan tindakan ini terhadap Defendan-Defendan bagi pihak Khor Kim Joo (Si Mati) yang kononnya merupakan suami kepada Plaintif dan juga menuntut bagi pihak zuriat ("issues") Khor Kim Joo (Si Mati) tersebut ke atas Harta Pusaka Khor Kiok Seng (Si Mati).

3. Bahawa melalui satu Perintah Mahkamah Tinggi Taiping yang bertarikh 21 Februari 2019, Khor Kim Joo (Si Mati) telah dibatalkan daripada Senarai Benefisiari-Benefisiari di bawah Surat Kuasa Mentadbir yang bertarikh 12 Disember 2014 bagi Harta Pusaka Khor Kiok Seng (Si Mati), maka Khor Kim Joo (Si Mati) bukanlah seorang benefisiari di bawah Harta Pusaka Khor Kiok Seng (Si Mati) dan justeru locus standi ke atas Harta Pusaka Khor Kiok Seng (Si Mati) untuk memulakan tindakan ini terhadap Defendan- Defendan dan juga un