CHOO KAH SING

DECISION

(Enclosure 4)

Introduction

[1]This was an application (encl. 4) filed by the plaintiff seeking for an interlocutory junction to restrain the defendant or its agents from terminating the supply of electricity to the premises known as No. 247, Kilang Ais, Jalan Suasa 2/2, Taman Suasa, 09000 Kulim, Kedah Darul Aman (hereinafter referred to as ‘the premises’) pending the disposal of the main suit.

[2]The defendant had raised a preliminary point for this Court to consider before hearing the substantive argument of the application of the plaintiff. The preliminary point which the defendant raised was that the plaintiff has no locus standi in this main suit, and that, flowing from this, this court need not entertain the plaintiff’s application.

[3]On 28.8.2016, this Court dismissed the plaintiff’s application. The plaintiff was not satisfied with the decision of this Court and filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal. This Decision serves as the grounds for this Court’s decision, and the reasons are set down as below.

Brief Background Facts The proceedings (Encl. 4)

[4]The parties had filed their affidavits and submissions in the following chronological order as below:

[5]The application was initially fixed for inter-partes hearing on 31.7.2016, but the hearing was adjourned as the parties had yet to exhaust their respective affidavits. The application was heard inter-partes on 28.8.2016.

The background facts of the main suit

[6]The plaintiff is a sole proprietor who is trading in the name and style of ‘NCP Ice Enterprise’. The plaintiff averred that she has rented the premises from one Superior Ice Sdn Bhd (hereinafter referred to as ‘the owner’).

[7]On 9.6.2016, the defendant’s personnel carried out a random inspection of the electricity meter installed at the premises. The defendant’s personnel discovered that the electricity meter had been tampered. They immediately fixed it to prevent further losses being incurred by the defendant.

[8]On the same day, a Notice of Termination was issued to the owner of the premises. The owner was informed that the defendant will terminate its service to supply electricity to the premises on 21.7.2016 pursuant to s. 38(1)Electricity Supply Act 1990

[9]The plaintiff, being the purported tenant of the premises filed this Writ action against the defendant. In the Writ action the plaintiff sought, inter alia, a declaration that the alleged tampering of the electricity meter was not caused by the plaintiff, the alleged tampered electricity meter could have been caused by faulty installation or faulty meter.

[10]It was on the above premise that the plaintiff had filed the application for an interlocutory injunction to stop the defendant or its agent from terminating the supply of electricity to the premises pending the disposal of the Writ action.

The Finding

[11]The defendant submitted that the customer who applied to the defendant for the supply of electricity to the premises is one Superior Ice Sdn. Bhd. (the owner).

[12]The application was made on 3.4.2008 (see exhibit ‘HMD-1’ the affidavit Hafizah Binti Md Desa – encl. 13).

[13]The defendant accepted the application and allocated an account for Superior Ice Sdn. Bhd. bearing Accoun