Hishamudin Yunus J:

This summons in chambers (encl. 55) is an interlocutory application by the plaintiff to amend the statement of claim.

At the hearing of the application, the Assistant State Legal Adviser, Selangor, Encik Kamarulzaman, appearing for the second and third defendants, informed the court that he has no objection to the application.

The first defendant, however, objected to the application. A preliminary objection was raised by Cik Deborah Kaur, the learned counsel for the first defendant, regarding the summons in chambers. She submitted that the summons in chambers was defective by reason of non-compliance with O. 32 r. 1 and Form 62 of the Rules of the High Court (the 'RHC'). She argued that there was non-compliance because the grounds for the application to amend the statement of claim were not stated in the summons in chambers. Learned counsel contended that, in the light of the word 'must' in O. 32 r. 1, it was mandatory for the applicant/plaintiff to state the grounds in the summons in chambers and that the failure to do so was fatal to the application.

Order 32 r. 1 states:

1. Mode of making application.

Except as provided by Order 25 rule 7, every app