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

1996 MarsdenLR 1433

HIGH COURT MALAYA, JOHOR BAHRU
SAMBU (M) SDN. BHD. – Appellant
Versus
STONE WORLD SDN. BHD. (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KOSTONE SDN. BHD.) & ANOR – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Abdul Malik Ishak J:

I am suprised that the first defendant lodged an appeal against my decision which was handed down on 15 February 1996 through their Counsel Mr. Rodney Gomez from Messr. Shearn Delarnore & Co. The brief facts that led to my decision dated 15 February 1996 may be summarised in this fashion.

On January 31, 1996, the Senior Assistant Registrar heard an application in chambers vide enclosure 5 where the plaintiff sought for the following prayers:

1. Bahawa Penghakiman Terus di bawah Aturan 14, Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah Tingi, 1980 dimasukkan bagi pihak plaintif terhadap defendan pertama dalam jumlah RM3,140,197.10 atau secara alternatif jumlah RM1,915,189.00 bersama dengan faedah pada kadar 8% setahun dari tarikh penghakiman sehingga tarikh penyelesaian.

2. Bahawa kos permohonan ini di bayar oleh defendan pertama kepada plaintif.

In the event, the Senior Assistant Registrar gave summary judgment in the sum of RM1,915,189.00 against the first defendant who, in due course, filed a notice of appeal to the Judge in Chambers under O. 56 of the Rules of the High Court, 1980 ('RHC'). This was a perfectly legitimate course of action taken by the first defendant. When th

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