KAMDAR SDN BHD vs BIPINCHANDRA BALVANTRAI & ORS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 MarsdenLR 1773

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KAMDAR SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
BIPINCHANDRA BALVANTRAI & ORS – Respondent

Table of Content
1. this appeal addresses the dismissal of the plaintiff's action. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. allegations against defendants pertain to fiduciary breaches and fraudulent transactions. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
3. the trial judge's interpretations led to flawed conclusions on evidence. (Para 19 , 26 , 27)
4. judicial errors leading to remittance for re-hearing. (Para 21 , 22)
5. examination of claims of fiduciary breaches and misappropriation. (Para 32)

[1] This appeal arises from the dismissal of the appellants action in the court below. In these grounds, the parties will be referred to as they were in the High court for expedience.

[2] The appellant company known as Kamdar Sdn Bhd was the plaintiff in the High court (the plaintiff). The plaintiff was, and remains until today, a wholly owned subsidiary of a public listed company known as Kamdar Group (M) Berhad (KGMB). At the material time, in 2005, KGMB was in the process of being listed.

[3] The three respondents were the defendants in the court below. The three defendants are Bipinchandra a/l Balvantrai, the 1st defendant (Bipinchandra); Jayesh R Kamdar Rajnikant, the 2nd defendant (Jayesh) and Yap Kim Hong, the 3rd defendant (Y

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2016 MarsdenLR 1773

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAKAMDAR SDN BHD – AppellantVersusBIPINCHANDRA BALVANTRAI & ORS – Respondent

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
KAMDAR SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
BIPINCHANDRA BALVANTRAI & ORS – Respondent