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

2007 MarsdenLR 2596

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
CHUNG KUO PING – Appellant
Versus
MALAYSIAN ASSURANCE ALLIANCE BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Edwin Tsen Tan Bing,Voo Sin Pei ,Respondent Advocate: Lim Pitt Kong

JUDGMENT

Mokhtar Sidin JCA:

[1] This appeal originated from the Sessions Court where there were two suits, namely Summons No. 52-03-1996 and No. 52-04-1996. In both cases initially there were several plaintiffs. At the High Court learned counsel for the plaintiffs discontinued the action by Chung Chao Lung Timber (Contracting) Company Sdn Bhd (3rd plaintiff) and Rapid Growth Sdn Bhd (4th plaintiff) leaving the present appellant Chung Kuo Ping @ Richard and Sri Gemawan Sdn Bhd. When the matter came up in the High Court it was disclosed that Sri Gemawan Sdn Bhd had been wound up in January 1996 and as such the company has no locus standi to pursue the matter without a written consent from the liquidator, and thus leaving the 1st plaintiff alone as the appellant. The appeals before us are in respect of the two original suits in the Sessions Court now with only the 1st plaintiff as the appellant. We will refer to the parties as they were in the Sessions Court.

[2] The statement of claim in respect of Summons No. 52-03-1996 is as follows:

1. The Plaintiffs are the legal owner of a unit of Kenworth Logging Truck paccar complete with peerless trailer bearing Engine No. 10521826, Chassis No. 1

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