JUDGMENT
[1] This is an application by the 1st plaintiff (Mexaland Development Sdn Bhd) by way of an ex parte summons in chambers (encl. 14) pursuant to
[2] The present ex parte summons in chambers was filed on 2 July 2007 with a certificate of urgency. I heard this ex parte summons in chambers on 11 July 2007 and, after considering the written submission of counsel, had dismissed the application on 16 July 2007. The reason for the dismissal was that, firstly, the application should not have been made by way of an ex parte application: it should have been inter parte ; and, secondly, the applicant/1st plaintiff does not have a caveatable interest.
[3] The 1st plaintiff had entered the caveat pursuant to a clause (cl. 6) of a joint-venture
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.