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

2025 MarsdenLR 4752

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CHEONG YONG YIN – Appellant
Versus
BANDAR UTAMA CITY ASSETS SDN BHD – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Deshnon Kumar ,Respondent Advocate: Ng Chia How

JUDGMENT

Akhtar Tahir J:

Introduction

[1] The Plaintiff by way of this Originating Summons ("OS") is seeking to set aside a decision of the Magistrate given on 3 August 2020 in a civil suit WA-A72-15-01/2019.

[2] The provisions of law mentioned in the intitulement of the OS are O 7, 28, 5(3) &(4) and 92(4) of the Rules of 2012 ("the Rules").

[3] It is pointless to reproduce all the provisions of the Rules mentioned in the intitulement as all are general provisions Suffice if O 7(2) 1A is reproduced here:

2. Forms of originating summons (O 7 r. 2)

(1A) Every originating summons shall state in its intitulement any provision of these Rules and any provision of any written law under which the Court is being moved.

[4] The provision of the written law mentioned in the intitulement are ss 23,32,34 of the of Judicature Act 1964, As s 23 is a general provision of the law it need not be reproduced. The relevant provisions of the law are ss 32 and 34 which for ease of reference are reproduced here:

Section 32

The High Court may call for and examine the record of any civil proceedings before any subordinate Court for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety


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