SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 MarsdenLR 3157

HIGH COURT MALAYA MELAKA
ZAHARI ZAINUL & ORS – Appellant
Versus
KHAIRUL AZIZI RAMLI & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: MA-12ANCvC-10-09/2020]



Petitioner Advocates:Nur Queen Shazza Wirakarnain ,Respondent Advocate: Nazrul Afeeq Nor Azzman

An application to amend a judgment must not cause prejudice to the other parties and should be made in a timely manner as per established legal principles.

Headnote:(A) Rules of Court 2012 – Order 20 r 11 – Application to amend judgment – Plaintiffs sought to amend a previous judgment for clarity and enforcement, citing clerical errors under O 20 r 11 – Court determined the proposed amendments did not meet requirements for amendment and would prejudice Defendants – Delay in making the application also noted – Court upheld prior dismissal. (Paras 12, 18, 24, 27, 28)

Facts of the case: Plaintiffs filed a writ against Defendants, leading to a default judgment for RM167,624.00 due to non-appearance. Following bankruptcy proceedings against the first Defendant and proposed amendments to clarify judgment, the application was dismissed. (Paras 1, 5, 8, 11)

Findings of Court: The High Court found the Sessions Court did not err in dismissing the amendment application, affirming the integrity of the initial judgment. (Paras 28, 29)

Issues: Key considerations included whether the amendments were necessary, the potential prejudice to Defendants, and the delay in filing the application. (Paras 23, 24)

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that amendments to a judgment must not cause injustice to the other parties and must reflect the intention of the original court ruling. (Paras 25, 26)

Result: Appeals dismissed, and costs ordered against Plaintiffs.

JUDGMENT

Maidzuara Mohammed JC:

[1] Enclosure 1 was the Appellants' appeal against the order of the Sessions Court granted on 17 August 2020 dismissing the Appellants' application to amend the judgment in default of appearance ("Judgment") entered by the Appellants against the Respondents on 24 July 2015.

[2] The Appellants were the Plaintiffs while the Respondents were the Defendants in the proceedings before the Sessions Court.

[3] The Appellants will be referred to as the Plaintiffs and the Respondents will be referred to as the Defendants as they appeared in the proceedings before the Sessions Court.

Events Material To This Appeal

[4] On 25 June 2015, the Plaintiffs filed a writ against the Defendants.

[5] The Statement of Claim was dated 22 June 2015. In the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiffs prayed for the following relief:

"(a) bayaran sebanyak RM167,624.00;

(b) faedah terhadap jumlah RM167,624.00 tersebut pada kadar 8% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira dari tarikh writ dikeluarkan sehingga penghakiman;

(c) faedah terhadap jumlah penghakiman pada kadar 5% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira 14 hari dari tarikh penghakiman ke tarikh penyelesaian;

(d) kos guaman ini; dan

(e) lain-lain perintah yang Mahkamah Yang Mulia fikirkan perlu dan patut. "

[6] On 24 July 2015, when all the Defendants failed to enter an appearance, the Plaintiffs entered the Judgment against all the Defendants.

[7] The Judgment where material read as follows:

"PENGHAKIMAN

Tiada kehadiran telah dimasukkan oleh Defendan Pertama, Khairul Azizi Bin Ramli, Defendan Kedua, Ifaziramzi Bin Ibrahim, dan Defendan Ketiga, Nik Mohd Khairuddin Bin Ibrahim dalam tindakan ini.

ADALAH PADA HARI INI DIHAKIMI bahawa Defendan- Defendan hendaklah membayar kepada Plaintif-Plaintif jumlah Penghakiman sebanyak RM167,624.00 berserta faedah terhadap jumlah RM167,624.00 tersebut pada kadar 8% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira dari tarikh writ dikeluarkan sehingga penghakiman, faedah terhadap jumlah penghakiman pada kadar 5% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira 14 hari dari tarikh penghakiman ke tarikh penyelesaian, kos atas dasar peguamcara-anakguam dan kos tindakan ini sejumlah RM1,322.00 seperti berikut:

[8] In the period thereafter, the Plaintiffs commenced bankruptcy proceedings against the first Defendant.

[9] The Court struck out the bankruptcy notice on the ground that the Judgment was "kabur'. The Court held the view that the bankruptcy notice was not clear as to the amount sought given that there were multiple Plaintiffs who sued, among others, the first Defendant.

[10] On 28 February 2020 (more than 5 years after the Judgment was entered, drawn up and sealed by the Court), the Plaintiffs filed an application to amend the Judgment (Enclosure 7).

[11] The proposed amendments to the Judgment were as follows:

"CADANGAN PENGHAKIMAN TERPINDA

Tiada kehadiran telah dimasukkan oleh Defendan Pertama, Khairul Aziz Bin Ramli, Defendan Kedua Ifaziramzi Bin Ibrahim dan Defendan Ketiga Nik Mohd Khairuddin Bin Ibrahim dalam tindakan ini;

ADALAH PADA HARI INI DIHAKIMI bahawa Defendan- Defendan hendaklah membayar kepada Plaintif-Plaintif jumlah Penghakiman RM167,624.00 disenaraikan seperti ketetapan pembahagian berikut:-

i. Plaintif Pertama = RM22,659.00

ii. Plaintif Kedua = RM14,659.00

iii. Plaintif Ketiga = RM15,099.00

iv. Plaintif Keempat = RM35,099.00

v. Plaintif Kelima = RM 5,099.00

vi. Plaintif Keenam = RM 5,099.00

vii. Plaintif Ketujuh = RM 1,118.00

viii. Plaintif Kelapan = RM 3,099.00

ix. Plaintif Kesembilan = RM 3,099.00

x. Plaintif Kesepuluh = RM17,198.00

xi. Plaintif Kesebelas = RM 3,099.00

xii. Plaintif KeduaBelas = RM17,099.00

xiii. Plaintif KetigaBelas = RM 5,099.00

xiv. Plaintif KeempatBelas = RM20,099.00

berserta faedah terhadap jumlah RM167,624.00 tersebut pada kadar 8% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira dari tarikh writ dikeluarkan sehingga penghakiman, faedah terhadap jumlah penghakiman pada kadar 5% setahun dengan kiraan harian dikira 14 hari dari tarikh penghakiman ke tarikh penyelesaian, kos atas


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top