SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2020 MarsdenLR 790

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
HALIM SAAD – Appellant
Versus
CHAN YOK PE – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Khalid Yusoff,Mohd Faiz Iskandar ,Respondent Advocate: Muhammad Syafiq Amani Md Sabri

JUDGMENT

S Nantha Balan JCA:

Introduction

[1] This is an appeal by the appellant (defendant) against the decision of the learned Judicial Commissioner of the High Court dated 3 December 2019 ("the JC") dismissing the defendant's application (encl 40) to set aside the judgment/order of the High Court dated 12 July 2019 given under O 14 Rules of 2012 ("ROC") whereby judgment was entered against the defendant. The defendant's application (encl 40) is predicated on O 42 r 13, O 45 r 9 and O 47 r 1 ROC. But the specific provision on setting aside of judgments and orders is O 42 r 13 ROC. For brevity and convenience, we shall refer to the parties by their titles in the High Court ie as "plaintiff" and "defendant" respectively. On 18 September 2020, we dismissed the defendant's appeal. These are the reasons for our decision.

Background

[2] The plaintiff and defendant are well known to each other and have had previous business dealings with each other. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant for recovery of a sum of RM2,500,00.00 being the balance of a friendly loan which was given by the plaintiff to the defendant. According to the plaintiff, the defendant was in need of funds and pursuan


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top