Mokhtar Sidin JCA:

[1] The dispute is essentially between the appellant and the 1st respondent over properties and monies which were acquired and share allotments in companies which were incorporated in the course of their partnership business.

[2] The appellant started his business in 1955 when he was 22 years old on a 5-foot way, selling assorted goods, then proceeded to operate his business as a sole proprietorship on 1 September 1957 and thereafter in partnership with his elder brother, the 1st respondent on 1 January 1963, both under the name and style of Soo Chew Trading. The partnership business, which essentially assumed the business of the sole proprietorship, was engaged in trading and distribution of general merchandise, covering assorted household products, toiletries and infant products.

[3] In the course of the partnership business, several trademarks in respect of infant and household products were registered. In the course of and with the expansion of the partnership business, the respondent companies (the companies) were incorporated. Almost at or about the same time and thereafter, landed properties were purchased and registered in the individual and joint names of the appellant and the 1st respondent and also in the names of the companies. Over the years, public quoted shares and private company shares were also purchased. Over the course of the years, shares in the companies were allotted in the names of the appellant and the 1st respondent and in the names of family members, namely, the 1st respondent's wife, his 3 sons, his 2 daughters-in-law, a nephew and the appellant's wife.

[4] Sometime in 1989, the business and goodwill of the partnership was transferred to the 2nd respondent. Following the transfer of the partnership business, several trademarks in respect of infant and household products registered in the joint names of the appellant and the 1st respondent were assigned to the 2nd respondent.

[5] Towards the end of 1993, the Department of Inland Revenue initiated investigations into the financial affairs of the partnership business and the companies. Following the tax investigations, the dispute between the appellant and the 1st respondent arose over the assets and finances of the partnership and the share allotments in the companies. In November 1994, the employment of the appellant's daughter, Soo Li Lih (PW4) as an executive officer of the 2nd respondent was terminated. In May 1995, the appellant's mandate as a signatory of the companies' bank accounts was terminated. On or about 3 July 1995, the 2nd respondent issued a letter terminating payment of all salary and expenses due to the appellant with effect from 1 July 1995.

[6] The appellant commenced proceedings against the respondents on 11 July 1995 under Penang High Court civil Suit No: 22-159-1995. The appellant was the plaintiff in the Court below. He filed a writ of summons against all the respondents.

[7] On 13 July 1995 the appellant obtained an ex parte order of injunction restraining the respondents from, amongst other things, determining his authority, rights, interests and benefits, including his monthly salary and expenses, and from disposing of any of the assets of the respondents. After an inter parte hearing, an interim injunction pending trial was granted on 21 December 1995. In the meantime, the 1st and 2nd respondents commenced proceedings against the appellant under Kuala Lumpur D3-22-308-1995 (later Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-317-1995) in respect of the trademarks.

[8] Essentially, the appellant's claims in the proceedings under Penang High Court Civil Suit No 22-159-1995 are for various declarations and reliefs in respect of properties and shares purchased with partnership monies, monies belonging to the partnership and the shares allotments in the companies. Primarily, the 1st and 2nd respondents' claim in the proceedings under Penang High Court Civil Suit No: 22-317-1995 is that the trade marks registered in the