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



JUDGMENT

Hasan Lah JCA:

Introduction

[1] The applicants in this case are the defendants in the suit filed by the respondent, the plaintiff in the High Court.

[2] By a notice of motion dated 1 October 2007 (encl. 6a) the applicants applied for the following orders:

(a) that the notice of appeal filed by the applicants on 1 June 2007 be amended by substituting case number "22-28-2003" with case number "21-9-2002";

(b) that the applicants be granted extension of time to file the appeal record.

[3] The said application was supported by an affidavit affirmed by the learned State Legal Adviser for the state of Pahang. In his affidavit he explained that the correct case number is 21-9-2002 and not 22-28-2003 as stated in the notice of appeal. The mistake was due to the fact that case number 22-28-2003 was also filed by the plaintiff in respect of the same land which was the subject-matter in case number 21-9-2002.

[4] The applicants had made an application to the High Court to amend the said notice of appeal but it was dismissed by the High Court on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to hear that application.

[5] It was further stated in the applicants' affidavit that due to the mista

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