Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
KEJENDRAN NADARAJAN – Appellant
Versus
KAVITAH VATHUMALAI & ANOR (ENCLS 1 & 7) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's discretion on intervention application (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. background facts of the parties involved (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. parties' arguments regarding intervention (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. applicable laws for intervention applications (Para 19 , 20) |
| 5. court's reasoning for denying intervention (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. established principles governing intervention applications (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. conclusion and cost order (Para 29) |
Introduction
[1] In this Originating Summons, the Plaintiff seeks the removal of a private caveat lodged by the Defendant. During the proceedings, a separate application was filed under Encl 7 by a Proposed Intervener, requesting leave to intervene and be added as a Co-Defendant in this suit.
[2] This decision addresses the application set out in Encl 7.
The Prevailing Issue
[3] The central question in this case is whether this Court should exercise its discretion to grant the application in Encl 7. Consequently, the pertinent issue for this Court to consider is whether the Proposed Intervener has established a sufficient legal basis or interest to justify his interventi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
