JUDGMENT

Mohd. Hishamuddin bin Mohd. Yunus JC:

At the commencement of the hearing of this O.14 application, the learned Counsel for the defendants made a preliminary objection. He objected to the plaintiff's affidavits as set out in enclosures 7, 14, 15 and 43. He contended that these affidavits were not in compliance with O.14 r.2 and Form No. 18 of the Rules of the High Court and were therefore defective. And since these affidavits were defective, therefore, this Court ought to dismiss this application for summary judgment. Order 14 r. 2 states:

Manner in which application under Rule 1 must be made:

[Order 14]2 (1) An application under rule 1 must be made by summons supported by an affidavit in Form 18 verifying the facts on which the claim, or the part of a claim, to which the application relates is based and stating that in the deponent's belief there is no defence except as to the amount of any damages claimed.

(2) Unless the Court otherwise directs, an affidavit for the purposes of this rule may contain statements of information or belief with the sources and grounds thereof.

(3) The summons, a copy of the affidavit in support and of any exhibits referred to therein must be served on the defendant not less than 4 clear days before the return day.

Form No. 18 is as follows:

No. 18Affidavit On Application Under Order 14 rule 2,By Or On Behalf Of Plaintiff

I, ............. of ............... (the abovenamed plaintiff, or solicitor for the abovenamed plaintiff, or clerk to the plaintiff's solicitor, or clerk to the plaintiff, or as the case may be) do make oath (or affirm) and say as follows:

1. The defendant ............ is, and was at the commencement of this action, justly and truly indebted to (me, or the abovenamed plaintiff) in the sum of $............... for the ................ The particulars of the said claim appear by the endorsement on the writ of summons in this action.

2. It is within my own knowledge that the said debt was incurred and still is due and owing as aforesaid.

or (2) I am informed by (state source of information) and/or I verily believe (state grounds of believe) that the said debt was incurred and is still owing as aforesaid).

3. I verily believe that there is no defence to this action.

4. I am duly authorized by the plaintiff to make this affidavit (delete if sworn by plaintiff)

Sworn (or affirmed) as in Form 78

The learned Counsel for the defendants argued that:

(a) nowhere in the affidavits did the deponent concerned state positively that he has personal knowledge of the matter deposed to by him; alternatively, nor did he state the source of the information set out in the affidavits; and (b) it was further pointed out that the deponent concerned did not state his address.

Encl. 7 is the affidavit of Lee Chin Keong affirmed on 13 February 1989. It is the first and main affidavit relied upon by the plaintiff to support this Order 14 application. Paragraphs 1 and 7 of this nine-paragraph affidavit state:

Affidavit

I, Lee Chin Kheong (NRIC No. 1409462) of full age do solemnly and sincerely affirm and say as follows: 1. I am the Attorney of the plaintiff abovenamed and am duly authorized to affirm and make this affidavit on their behalf. ....... 7. It is within my knowledge that the said debt was incurred and still due and owing as aforesaid.

Encl. 14 is the "further affidavit in reply" of Lee Chin Kheong (there is an "affidavit in reply" of Lee Chin Kheong, encl.13, affirmed on 27 September 1989, but this affidavit was not objected to by the learned Counsel) affirmed on 14 October, 1989. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this five-paragraph affidavit state:

Further Affidavit In Reply

I, Lee Chin Kheong (NRIC No:1409462)of full age do solemnly affirm and say as follows:

1. I am the Attorney of the abovenamed Plaintiff and am duly authorized to make and affirm this affidavit on their behalf.

2. This affidavit is made in support of my affidavit in reply affirmed on 27 September 1989 filed h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document