JUDGMENT

Chang Min Tat J:

This is an application by the defendants under the provisions of O. 49 r. 8(1) Rules of the Supreme Court for consolidation of the action herein with another instituted in Kuala Lumpur. The rule is couched in these words.

8(1) Two or more actions may be consolidated by order of the Court or a Judge, when such a course appears necessary or advisable.

I am satisfied on the provisions of sub-rr. (2) and (3) that the application for consolidation with the Kuala Lumpur action to be thenceforth carried on in Kuala Lumpur is properly made in Penang. The plaintiffs make no point on this but however resist the application strenuously.

The corresponding rule in England refers to consolidation by order of the Court or a Judge in the manner in use immediately before 1 November 1875, in the Superior Courts of Common Law. It has been held in Horwood v. Statesman Publishing Co. Ltd. [1929] 98 LJKB 450 CA as stated in the footnote (h) at p. 389 of Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edn., Vol. 30, that this rule must be interpreted in the light of the changes of rules as to joinder of parties and causes of action. Since we have adopted these changes in our Rules of the Sup