Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
MANIVANAN KUPPUSAMY – Appellant
Versus
DATUK GANESAN SUBRAMANIAM & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the sum advanced is disputed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. financial arrangements between parties outlined. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. defendant claims investment status without evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 15) |
| 4. defendant's testimony lacks credibility. (Para 12 , 14 , 17 , 19) |
| 5. judicial observations emphasize procedural compliance. (Para 13 , 22 , 26) |
| 6. partial repayment acknowledges debt relationship. (Para 18 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. final dismissal of appeal supported by evidence. (Para 29) |
Introduction
[1] In this judgment, the parties are referred to as they were before the trial court. This was an appeal by the defendant against the decision of the Sessions court. At the conclusion of the full trial, the Sessions court ruled in favour of the plaintiff and allowed the plaintiff's claim for RM450,000.00.
[2] The primary issue in this appeal revolved around the nature of the sum of RM650,000.00 advanced by the plaintiff to the defendant. Essentially, the question before the trial court was whether this amount constituted a friendly loan extended to the defendant or an investment made in the defendant's company, Samdo Smart Solar (M) Sdn Bhd.
[3] Upo
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
