JUDGMENT

Lau Bee Lan J:

This is an appeal by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd appellants/1st' 2nd and 4th defendants (hereinafter referred to as the "1st, 2nd and 4th defendants" or "the defendants" as the case may be) against the decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge made on 27 January 2005 allowing the respondent's ("plaintiff") application with costs to be taxed unless agreed (encl. 2). At the outset the learned counsel for the plaintiff, Mr. Jonathan Chong, raised a preliminary objection: firstly, although they have been served with the record of appeal, no notice of appeal was properly served on them in conformity with O. 49 r. 6 of the Subordinate Courts Rules 1980 ("the SCR"); secondly, there was no proper appeal before the Court in that the record of appeal did not contain the sealed order and therefore the plaintiff would not know against what order the defendants are appealing against; instead what was in the record of appeal was merely the draft order at pp. 118-119 signed by both parties but not the registrar.

Mr. Ivan Hussein, learned counsel for the 1st, 2nd and 4th defendants replied that they had placed a copy of the notice of appeal in the pigeon hole of the firm of the p