COURT OF APPEAL,PUTRAJAYA
DARSHAN SINGH HULLAN & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
RANGASAMY KAILASAM & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. sale and purchase agreement details (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 2. claims of non est factum and fraud (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court analysis of witness credibility (Para 22) |
[1] On 29 January 2010 the learnedHigh Court Judge at Kuala Lumpur allowed the 1st respondent's claim for a sum ofRM410,000.00, interest and costs against the 1st and 2nd appellants. In his judgmentthe learned High Court Judge ordered the appellants to jointly and severally pay the 1st respondent special damages in the sum of RM410,000.00 which was the amountoutstanding from the 3rd defendant (not a party in this appeal) to the 1st respondentunder the sale and purchase agreement dated 27 January 1999. The learned judge alsoordered that the 1st respondent was not liable to pay the outstanding amount underthe charge documents to the 2nd respondent (who is the 4th defendant in the HighCourt).
[2] Not satisfied with the decision,the 1st and 2nd appellants appealed to this Court against that decision.
[3] For convenience, in thisappeal the appellants will be referred to as the 1st and 2nd defendants and the1st and 2nd respondents as the plaintiff and 4th defendant respectively.
[4] The 3rd defenda
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.