JUDGMENT

Vernon Ong JCA:

Introduction

[1] The two appeals herein relate to a decision of the High Court sitting in Kota Bharu which allowed part of the plaintiffs' claim whereby the defendants were required to produce particulars of each of the plaintiffs' entitlements to the judgment sum.

[2] Appeal 1850 is the defendants' appeal whilst Appeal 1881 is the plaintiffs' appeal. In this judgment, the parties shall be referred to as they were in the Court below.

The Salient Facts

[3] The 271 plaintiffs are settlers in Rancangan Felda Kemahang.

[4] The defendants are partners of a legal firm ("the Firm") which had acted for the plaintiffs to initiate proceedings against Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah Persekutuan ("Felda") and two others for damages ("the Felda Suit").

[5] On 13 January 2008, the plaintiffs obtained judgment against Felda and two others for damages in the sum of RM7,810,000.00 together with interest and costs.

[6] Pending the disposal of Felda's appeal to the Court of Appeal, the judgment sum together with interest amounting to RM11,322,592.00 was paid into a joint stakeholder's account under the names of Messrs Wong Lu Peen & Tunku Alina, solicitors for Felda and the Firm as solicitors for the plaintiffs. On 26 June 2009, the Court of Appeal dismissed Felda's appeal and affirmed the decision of the High Court. Felda's application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court was dismissed. Felda's subsequent application to the Federal Court to review the dismissal of the leave application was also dismissed. After the dismissal of the review application, the judgment sum was paid into the Firm's trust account.

[7] Out of the judgment sum, the defendants have paid a sum of RM19,000.00 to each of the plaintiffs totalling RM6,726,000.00, leaving a balance of RM4,510,983.00 and the additional interest of RM85,589.00 and costs in the possession of the defendants.

Plaintiffs' Claim

[8] In essence, the plaintiffs' claim is for an account to be taken of the judgment sum on the following terms as reflected in para 23 of the amended statement of claim:

"(a) Satu akaun untuk bayaran-bayaran yang diterima oleh defendan pertama defendan kedua berkenaan dengan atau mengenai penghakiman bertarikh 13 Januari 2008 yang diperolehi oleh plaintif-plaintif terhadap Lembaga Kemajuan Tanah Persekutuan (Felda), Ibrahim bin Ismail dan Felda Palm Industries Sdn Bhd dalam guaman mahkamah Tinggi di Kota Bharu Guaman No: 22-85-2002 dan bayaran dibuat untuk jumlah yang didapati hendaklah dibuat.

(b) Defendan-defendan mengemukakan butir-butir terperinci seperti berikut:

i) Jumlah wang Penghakiman serta faedah yang diperolehi dari tindakan Guaman No: 22-85-2002 difailkan sehingga selesai proses rayuan dan permohonan untuk kebenaran semakan kehakiman iaitu pada 26 Ogos 2010;

ii) Faedah ke atas wang Penghakiman dari 8 Mei 2008 hingga 26 Ogos 2010 yang disimpan di dalam akaun bersama di Maybank yang dibuka di atas nama peguamcara Tetuan Wong Lu Peen & Tunku Alina dan defendan-defendan berkaitan wang penghakiman tersebut;

iii) Faedah ke atas wang penghakiman dari 26 Ogos 2010 hingga 1 Oktober 2010 dan/atau penyerahan sebahagian wang penghakiman kepada plaintif-plaintif yang disimpan di dalam akaun defendan-defendan berkaitan wang penghakiman tersebut;

iv) Kos-kos yang diberikan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi, Mahkamah Rayuan dan Mahkamah Persekutuan yang defendan-defendan perolehi sepanjang mengendalikan kes;

v) Jumlah wang penghakiman yang setiap plaintif-plaintif sepatutnya terima;

vi) Yuran guaman serta kos pengurusan yang dikenakan;

vii) Sama ada bil berkaitan yuran guaman telah disediakan dan dihantar dan jika ada tarikh dihantar.

(c) Bayaran dibuat oleh defendan pertama dan defendan kedua kepada plaintif-plaintif untuk jumlah yang kena dibayar atau didapati berhutang kepada plaintif-plaintif atas pengambilan akaun tersebut."

Defendants' Defence

[9] According to the amended statement of defence, the defendants contend that the plaintiffs were not entitled to