GERARD JUDE TIMOTHY PEREIRA vs KASI KL PALANIAPPAN

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 MarsdenLR 1113

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GERARD JUDE TIMOTHY PEREIRA – Appellant
Versus
KASI KL PALANIAPPAN – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Kamaleswari Shanmugam Chettar,Sarjit Kaur Jeswant Singh ,Respondent Advocate: Ranjit Singh,Villie Nethi

Table of Content
1. facts of loan existence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. high court's dismissal overview. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
3. evidential burden discussion. (Para 12 , 14 , 51)
4. conclusion reached based on legal misinterpretations by trial judge. (Para 13)
5. clarification on burden of proof as per evidence act. (Para 15 , 16)

[1] This is the appellant's appeal against the decision of the Kuala Lumpur High Court dated 14 April 2015 in dismissing the appellant's claim against the respondent.

[2] The appellant was the plaintiff and the respondent was the defendant at the High Court. In this judgment, we will refer to the parties as they were in the High Court.

Brief Facts

[3] The plaintiff's claim at the High Court was for the return of a sum of RM2,670,000.00 given by him to the defendant as personal loans.

[4] The plaintiff's pleaded case was that the said sum was effected under various payments made through telegraphic transfers between the years 2008 and 2009 (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Friendly Loan").

[5] The plaintiff sent two notices of demand to the defendant for the return of the Friendly Loan, the first in September 2011 and the second in May 2012, but th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2017 MarsdenLR 1113

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAGERARD JUDE TIMOTHY PEREIRA – AppellantVersusKASI KL PALANIAPPAN – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
GERARD JUDE TIMOTHY PEREIRA – Appellant
Versus
KASI KL PALANIAPPAN – Respondent