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

1996 MarsdenLR 594

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ADARSH PANDIT – Appellant
Versus
VIKING ENGINEERING SDN BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Mubashir Mansor ,Respondent Advocate: Haji Sulaiman Abdullah,Shobina

JUDGMENT

Zainun Ali JC:

(Lampiran 44)

[1] This is an application by the Defendant under O 23 Rules of the High 1980 for security for costs to be furnished by the Plaintiff.

[2] This matter has a somewhat checquered history, not least since it involves allegations of fraud, misrepresentation and a host of other disputes of a contentious nature, and perhaps compounded by the Plaintiff being a foreigner.

[3] The facts as may briefly be recounted appear to be that the Plaintiff is ordinarily resident outside the Court's jurisdiction. He was appointed by the Defendant to be its Project Manager for the purpose of securing the local installation contract (the contract) for the Sungai Piah Hydro-Electric Project with Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd (BHEL) of India.

[4] By a letter dated 17 July 1986 the Defendant confirmed in writing, its verbal agreement to pay the Plaintiff a sum of RM200,000 for his work and efforts in securing the local installation contract and it was expressly agreed that the sum of RM200,000 becomes payable to the Plaintiff either upon the formal execution of the said contract or upon the formal award of the same to Defendant by BHEL. The contract was duly awarded to the De

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