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

2010 MarsdenLR 3094

HIGH COURT, KUALA LUMPUR
PUNITHAVATHI PUSHIPAMBIGAI PONNIAH – Appellant
Versus
GOH MARY & ORS – Respondent


Y.A. TUAN LEE SWEE SENG

Prologue

As is often the case in the administration of the estate of a deceased who died rich, there is a real likelihood of disputes not just amongst the beneficiaries but also amongst the administrators and at times between the administrators of the estate and the beneficiaries. Perhaps the deceased one Ganendra son of Ponnusamy had anticipated this and so he appointed the Plaintiff, a solicitor as an executrix to his estate together with another solicitor. He died in February 1994. The grant of Probate was dated 17.5.1994. However little progress was achieved in administering and distributing the deceased's estate in what was perceived as objections from and obstacles placed by some beneficiaries especially with respect to the Plaintiff's action in protecting the interest of the deceased adopted daughter one Amanda Shalini Ganendra. The Plaintiff said that the reason the testator appointed her and another solicitor to be the executors and trustees of his estate was his fear that his adopted daughter Amanda Ganendra might be discriminated against in the distribution of his estate. The said Amanda committed suicide in February 2004.

Problem

Differences and disp

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