Abdul Rahman Sebli FCJ:

[1] We had allowed the appellant's appeal by answering Leave Question 1 in the negative and declining to answer Leave Questions 2 and 3. The background to the appeals has its genesis in the High Court when the appellant, who sued in his capacity as the registered Public Officer of Eng Choon Association Muar (Eng Choon Huay Kuan, Muar), Johor filed 50 suits against 50 different defendants (one of whom was the respondent) for similar reliefs in relation to 50 different premises.

[2] The 50 suits were filed and registered separately and were given different registration numbers. The reliefs that the appellant sought against the defendants were the following:

(a) An Order that the defendant and/or all persons that reside thereunder are required to vacate and deliver vacant possession of the relevant premises (in the case of the respondent, having specific address of 22-1, Jalan Hashim, 84000 Muar, Johor) for non-payment of quit rent;

(b) General and/or special damages to be assessed;

(c) Interest;

(d) Costs; and

(e) Such further and/or other reliefs as the Court deems fit and proper.

[3] In response, each of the 50 defendants filed a counterclaim against the app