ZAKI TUN AZMI, ZULKEFLI MAKINUDIN, GOPAL SRI RAM
LEMBAGA KEMAJUAN TANAH PERSEKUTUAN (FELDA) – Appellant
Versus
AWANG SOH MAMAT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the applicants were not present at trial. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. judicial discretion exercised against absent applicants. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. absence of legal representation affects appeal outcomes. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. judicial efficiency and diligence in legal representation emphasized. (Para 8) |
Gopal Sri Ram FCJ:
[1] We dismissed this application for leave and made the usual consequential orders. As we have said on previous occasions, this court does not give reasons for granting or refusing leave save in rare cases. This is such a case.
[2] The applicants before us seek leave on several questions which they contend meet the threshold that must be crossed by leave applications. But if you look at the questions carefully enough they are really alien to the fact pattern of this case. And the facts of this case have been thoroughly interrogated by both the majority and dissenting judgments in the Court of Appeal reported in Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah Persekutuan (Felda) & Anor v. Awang Soh Mamat & Ors [2009] 5 CLJ 1. We are therefore spared the task of regurgitating them here. Suffice that we make broad and general reference to them.
[3] The applicants were the second and third
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.