(delivering the judgment of the Court): The appellants, Malite Sdn. Bhd. sued all three respondents on February 8, 1977. The first and second respondents duly filed in their defence on May 4, 1977, whilst the third respondent on April 1, 1977. The pleadings were closed and the appellants filed entry for trial on October 15, 1977 and on July 18, 1978 the appellants changed their solicitors.

The subject-matter of the suit between the parties (K.L.C.S. No. 337/1977) is a piece of land held under document of title, Q.T.(R) 58 P.T. 45 Tapak Perusahaan Shah Alam. The land was originally owned by the third respondent. The appellants alleged that the first respondent acting as their agent and trustee accepted the offer of sale of the said land from the third respondent and that thereafter in breach of the trust caused the third respondent to transfer it to the second respondent. The purchase price was $135,000 of which $61,090.80 was paid by the appellants. The appellants claimed damages against the first and third respondents and re-transfer of the land to themselves against the second respondent. The defence of the three respondents is that the appellants are not the same company as the one for whom the first respondent acted and to whom the third respondent offered to sell the land in question. It is their defence that the land was offered for sale to a joint-venture company, yet to be formed of which the first respondent was to have 51% interests and for which he acted. The formation of this company was not approved by the Registrar of Companies and so the first respondent incorporated the second respondent as the successor to the said abortive joint-venture company and the land offered for sale by the third respondent was subsequently transferred to this newly incorporated company (the second respondent). The respondents claim therefore that the appellants are a complete stranger to the land transaction.

Meanwhile in order to protect their interests the appellants caused a private caveat to be entered against the land (Private Caveat Registration No. 27 of 1976, Jilid 2, Folio 50). The entry was made on July 9, 1976 and by the court's order dated July 24, 1978 the caveat was extended for a period of two years till July 24, 1980 and thereafter to such further period as when the civil suit between the parties shall have finally been determined.

Since entry for trial on October 15, 1977 until May 10, 1980 the civil suit remained dormant, whilst the land continued to be caveated for the benefit of the appellants, and much against the interests of the respondents No. (1) and No. (2). They thus applied on May 10, 1980 by summons-in-chambers for an order of early trial. To counter this move the appellants made an application for extension of the caveat whilst the respondents made a counter application to have the caveat removed. It is not understood why the appellants who already had their caveat extended to the date of the disposal of the civil suit, should again apply for the same extension. It could only be inferred that the appellants were more interested in perpetuating the caveat than in early settlement of the dispute. Whatever it may be, on July 21, 1980 Wan Hamzah J. ordered the extension of the caveat in term similar to that made by the court on July 24, 1978. He also made a consent order that the suit be tried on August 20 and 22, 1980.

So far so good. However, on August 20, 1980, when the suit was to be tried, the appellants moved the court by notice of motion filed four days earlier (August 16, 1980) for permission to add Seng Hup Electric Co. Sdn. Bhd. of No. 44-2 and 44-3 Jalan Treacher, Kuala Lumpur (herein referred to as Seng Hup) as a co-plaintiff and to amend certain parts of the statement of claim. The application was strenuously opposed by the respondents. Finally Wan Hamzah J. probably annoyed (incensed) by this last minute move, did not only reject the application to add Seng Hup as a co-plaintiff a