Pawan Ahmad J (delivering oral judgment):

After the hearing of the Originating Summons, certain orders were made and in particular orders were also made in terms of prayers 1-A, 2 and 3. As to prayer 1-A there was an alternative prayer numbered as 1-B but after having taken into consideration the affidavits filed in the matter and the submission of Counsel, it was my considered opinion that an order should be made in terms of prayer 1-A rather than the alternative prayer 1-B.

As to prayers 2 and 3, it is the applicants' own prayer that an order as to the calling of the meetings should be directed either to Tay Ek Seng Co. Sdn. Bhd, the first respondent company and/or the directors of the said company.Here again it is my considered opinion that the best persons to call the meeting are the directors of the first respondent company and I accordingly ordered that the meeting be called by them rather than by the first respondent company.

The solicitors for the parties were unable to agree on the draft order and on obtaining appointment appeared before the learned Assistant Registrar for settlement of the said draft on 30 October 1973.The Assistant Registrar quite rightly referred