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

1993 MarsdenLR 75

HIGH COURT MALAYA KOTA BHARU
TENGKU JAFFAR TENGKU AHMAD – Appellant
Versus
KARPAL SINGH – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Idris Yusoff J:

[1] Mr Karpal Singh the defendant in a civil suit filed by the plaintiff applies to strike out the writ of summons dated 16 December 1993 together with the statement of claim pursuant to O 18 r 19 of the Rules of the High 1980 and/or under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court on the following grounds:

(a) the plaintiff has no locus standi to bring the said suit. The said suit by the plaintiff is not maintainable against the defendant;

(b) the issues raised which relate to alleged criminality do not come within the jurisdiction of the Honourable Court;

(c) The Attorney-General and no one else is vested under the provisions of art 145(3) and s 5 of the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15) with the powers to institute proceedings under the Sedition Act;

(d) the said suit is scandalous, frivolous, vexatious and/or an abuse of the process of the Honourable Court;

(e) the alleged publication does not amount to defamation or sedition. There is no cause of action against the defendant.

[2] He also seeks an order that all further proceedings in respect of the said suit be stayed pending the disposal of this application.

[3] In his statement of claim the plaintiff seeks a total of 4

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