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

2000 MarsdenLR 1789

HISHAMUDIN YUNUS
JAYA HARTA REALTY SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
KOPERASI KEMAJUAN PEKERJA-PEKERJA LADANG BHD – Respondent


Advocates:
For the appellant - Steven Pung
For the respondent - Edwin Seibel; M/s Kas & Co

Table of Content
1. facts regarding the garnishment order and absence due to lack of notification. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
JUDGMENT

Hishamudin Yunus J:

Enclosure (61) is an appeal to the judge in chambers by the appellant/garnishee, a firm of solicitor known as Messrs Isharidah, Ho, Chong & Menon, against the decision of the learned senior assistant registrar made on 20 October 1997 in respect of encl. (27).

Enclosure (27) was an application before the senior assistant registrar to set aside a garnishment order made against the garnishee on 21 January 1997 in their absence.

The reason why the appellant/garnishee had applied to the senior assistant registrar to set aside his order was because they (ie, the appellant/garnishee) was not informed of the hearing date (ie, 21 January 1997) and was thus absent on the hearing day. In other words they were not given the opportunity to be heard.

On 20 October 1997 the senior assistant registrar heard the application to set aside (ie, encl. (27)) and dismissed it. Hence, this appeal.

I allowed the appeal because, in my judgement, there is merit in the application before the senior assistant registrar to set aside his order made on 21 January.

I am of

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