Hill JA (delivering oral JUDGMENT):

We considered this matter yesterday and I will now briefly state my view's without attempting to go into the merits. At this stage they are not in issue.

The applicant is asking the Court to reconsider some long standing litigation, which commenced in the early 1950s, and has now crossed the Indian Ocean to the High Court of India. He asks the Court to make an order that an order made by this Court in February 1960 be set aside.

The respondent asks that the applicant should give security for costs before his application is dealt with on the ground that the applicant is resident in India, where he has in fact been for some years, and that he has no property or assets in Malaya. The respondent has also affirmed in his affidavit that judgments of Malayan Courts have not been satisfied, nor has an order for security of costs been complied with and he has asked the Court to take these circumstances into consideration. I think it is proper that we do so.

It was urged on behalf of the applicant that owing to stringent currency restrictions in India any order requiring him to furnish security for costs would result in further delay as it would inevitably take time to arrange for the transfer of money to this country.

In my view as the applicant is out of the jurisdiction and in view of the past history of the litigation, the Court should require the applicant to give security for costs. Previously security in the sum of $1,000 was ordered and that is the figure that I would now fix. The proceedings should be stayed until the order is complied with. The respondent should have his costs, agreed at $250.

Order accordingly.