JUDGMENT

Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid JCA:

Introduction

[1] When a respondent is ordered to do an act under a mandatory injunction by a certain time and there is non-compliance of that order leading to a committal proceedings in which the respondent was fined, can the plaintiff then apply pursuant to O 45 r 6 of the Rules of 2012 to set a new time for the respondent to comply with that mandatory injunction and does the Court have the power under that provision to set a new time for compliance when the respondent has already been found guilty and fined. If the Court does not have the power to do so under O 45 r 6, can the Court still set a new time for compliance under its inherent power?

[2] Those were the main issues that were presented for decision by this Court . After hearing arguments of parties, this Court found in the negative to the first and second questions and in the affirmative to the third question. This Grounds of Judgment set out this Court 's decision.

[3] The parties will be referred to as they were at the High Court .

Background Facts

[4] The background facts are that the Plaintiff and the 1st and 2nd Defendants had entered into a settlement agreement to resolve ce