JUDGMENT

Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin Shah J:

(Striking Out Applications)

Preliminary

[1] In the case at hand, three enclosures have been filed by the defendants: Enclosure 15 by the 1st Defendant, encl 17 by the 2nd Defendant, and encl 28 by the 3rd Defendant.

[2] The three enclosures demonstrate the defendants' concerted efforts to attack the plaintiff's action in order to have it struck out under O 18 r 19(1) of the Rules of 2012 ("ROC 2012").

[3] The defendants' applications share a similar basis. The main contention is that res judicata applies to this case. The defendants claim in this regard that since the plaintiff attempted to commence actions on similar subject matter and based on similar facts several times before, this new complaint is now caught by res judicata.

Facts Of The Case: An Overview

[4] On 11 July 1992, the plaintiff acquired the property in dispute from a developer and financed it through a local financial institution ("bank").

[5] During the period 1994 - 2009, the plaintiff claimed he was responsible for repaying the loan.

[6] On 12 October 2009, however, the plaintiff allegedly discovered that a third party had fully paid his loan without his knowing who it was.

[7] Upon