HIGH COURT, KOTA KINABALU
DR PREMANANTHAN VASUTHEVAN – Appellant
Versus
JUVY S TULIPAS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background and context of the appeal. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments regarding document inclusion requirements. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
Background facts
In the Sessions Court judgment was entered against the appellant after a full trial. He has now appealed against the whole of the decision. On the date fixed for the hearing of the appeal the respondent raised a preliminary objection on two grounds, firstly that the appellant failed to comply with Order 49 rule 3A(1)(f) of the Subordinate Courts Rules 1980 ("the SCR") and secondly that no memorandum of appeal has been filed, in contravention of Order 55 rule 2 of the Rules of the High , 1980 ("the RHC") . The documents the appellant failed to include in the record of appeal are the witnesses' statements, the statement of agreed facts, the statement of disputed facts, the statement of issues to be tried, the affidavits used during the trial and all documentary exhibits.
First ground of objection
Order 49 rule 3A(1) (f) of the SCR provides as follows:
"(1) When the appellant who is represented by a solicitor has complied with the requirements of rule 2 of this Order, the appellant shall prepare the requisite number of copies of the appe
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.