Abdul Malik Ishak J:

Introduction

This was a tussle between the plaintiff, on the one hand, and the defendants, on the other hand. The chief protagonists in regard to enclosure 6 would be the plaintiff as against the second defendant (Entigma Sdn Bhd), the third defendant (Meadow Quest Sdn Bhd), the fourth defendant (Ideaseal Trading Sdn Bhd), the fifth defendant (Isaac Alexander Lamach), the sixth defendant (Rajaram a/l Letcheminasamy), the ninth defendant (Kaladolley a/p Francis Julious Pereira) and the fourteenth defendant (Balaguru a/l Thiagarajah). One way or the other, the other defendants were also involved.

Bankruptcy proceedings had been taken out against the first defendant (Dinesh Kumar a/l Jashbhai Nagjibha Patel) in the Commercial three court vide D3-29-2283-2000 and although an adjudicating and receiving orders were made, the matter was still pending in the D3 court. At the time of writing this judgment, I have not been advised about the progress of the D3 matter Be that as it may, when the case first came up before me on 12 May 2003, Mr Mohd Izral Khairy for the plaintiff informed me that defendants' numbers one (Dinesh Kumar a/l Jashbhai Nagjibha Patel), seven (Anil Singh Gill a/l S.S. Gill), eight (Vidhyadharan a/l A. Krishnan Kutty), ten (Jayaben Patel), eleven (Jashbhai Patel), twelve (Hemant Jashbhai Patel) and thirteen (Anparessu a/l Rajo) were absent. Mr Mohd Izral Khairy also informed the court that the plaintiff was not proceeding against the thirteenth defendant (Anparessu a/l Rajo).

Now, the plaintiff by way of a summons in chambers in encl 6 and pursuant to O 29 of the Rules of the High 1980 ("RHC") read with the inherent jurisdiction of this court sought for the following orders:-

A. ORDER TO ALLOW ENTRY AND SEARCH OF PREMISES

1. Each of the 1st and 5th to 14th Defendants, whether by himself, his agents, his servants, his licensees or any of them, or anyone appearing to be in control of the premises enumerated in Schedule 1 hereto ('the premises') be hereby ordered and directed to do the following:-

(a) To permit:-

(i) One (1) advocate and solicitor of the High court of Malaya from any one of the following law firms, namely Messrs Rashid & Lee, Messrs Tay & Partners, Messrs Choy & Partners, The Law Offices of David Oh and Messrs Skrine ('the Supervising Solicitor'); and

(ii) Not more than two (2) advocates and solicitors of the High court of Malaya from the firm of Messrs Shearn Delamore & Co ('The Plaintiff' s Solicitors'); and

(iii) Up to three (3) representatives of the Plaintiff; and

(iv) The bailiffs of this Honourable court,

to enter each of the Premises and any vehicles on the Premises so that they can search for, inspect, photograph or copy by xerographic or electronic digital means, and deliver into the safekeeping of the Plaintiff' s Solicitors all the documents and articles which are listed or described in Schedule 2 hereto ('the Listed Items') or which the persons carrying out the Order believe to be Listed Items

(b) To provide all necessary consents and permissions to enable the persons referred to in paragraph 1 (a) above to enter the Premises and to give all reasonable assistance to such persons in locating and identifying the Premises and Listed Items

(c) To allow those persons referred to in paragraph 1 (a) above:-

(i) to remain on the Premises until the search is completed; and

(ii) if necessary to re-enter the Premises on the same or following day or days in order to complete the search.

(d) To immediately identify and hand over to the Plaintiff' s Solicitors any of the Listed Items which are in his possession, power, custody or control.

(e) If any of the Listed Items exists or existed only in computer readable form, to immediately give the persons referred to in paragraph 1 (a) above effective access to the computers, with all necessary passwords, to enable them to be searched, and cause the Listed Items to be printed out, and a printout o