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

1971 MarsdenLR 296

AZMI, ONG HOCK SIM, SUFFIAN
TAN KANG HWA – Appellant
Versus
SAFETY INSURANCE CO LTD – Respondent


Advocates:
For the appellant - David Tay For the respondent - Edgar Joseph Jr.

JUDGMENT

Suffian FJ:

(read by Ong Hock Sim FJ ): This is an appeal against a decision of the High Court.

Mr. Joseph for the respondent (plaintiff in the lower court) argues that we have no jurisdiction to hear this appeal.

To understand his arguments, it is necessary to give a brief history of the matter. On 16 March 1971, the judgment appealed from was delivered in favour of the plaintiff against the two defendants. The second defendant was dissatisfied with it. On 29 March he gave notice of appeal under r. 6 of the Federal Court (Civil Appeals) (Transitional) Rules, 1963. That appeal was given a number (31 of 1971) by the Registry. The second defendant did not, however, at the time of filing the notice of appeal serve a notice of the appeal on the plaintiff, as required by r. 7. Realising on the authority of Tan Ting Kok v. Cheong Lep Keen and Anor. [1969] 1 MLJ 153 that his appeal would not therefore have been properly brought before the court, he wrote to the plaintiff asking for his consent to the withdrawal of the notice of appeal, so that he (the second defendant) could file a second notice. The plaintiff declined to give his consent. On 15 April, that is still within time

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