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

2001 MarsdenLR 1814

SURIYADI HALIM OMAR
MALAYAN BANKING BHD – Appellant
Versus
MAHMOOD ZUHDI HJ MOHD NOOR – Respondent


Advocates:
For the plaintiff - M/s Lua & Mansor
For the defendant - M/s Zainal & Mariani

JUDGMENT

Suriyadi Halim Omar J:

Sometime on 11 January 1993 the plaintiff had filed a writ of summons against the defendant at the High Court. On 10 October 1993 it was served on the defendant by way of substituted service, ie, by posting the said writ at the defendant's last known address. The defendant however did not enter appearance, hence prompting the plaintiff to enter a judgment in default of appearance (JID) against the defendant on 12 December 1993.

The defendant however made no effort to have the JID against him set aside until more than six years later, when he through his counsel filed a summons-in-chambers (encl. 10). The premise of the application was that as the service was bad, it being served at the last known address instead, the JID order thus was a nullity and must be set aside. The application was first heard before the senior assistant registrar, and upon hearing the application dismissed it thus leaving the JID unscathed.

Being dissatisfied with that decision the defendant again through his counsel filed a notice of appeal to the judge in chambers (encl. 15). At the commencement of the hearing of the notice of appeal before me, the plaintiff's counsel had ra

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top