1. ) RASHYTTEREN A/L KATHIRASEN 2. ) VETRIIVHELL A/L SARAVANAN v 1. ) VARATA RAJOO A/L NALASAMY 2. ) LONPAC INSURANCE BHD 3. ) DAYVANAI A/P MUNIANDY
5 cases cited
(0 SG, 5 foreign)
Catchwords
Dalam membuat keputusan terhadap permohonan ini, saya telah meneliti prinsip-prinsip undang-undang yang mantap berhubung permohonan untuk mengemukakan keterangan baru di peringkat rayuan, sebagaimana yang digariskan di bawah Aturan 55 Kaedah 7(a) Kaedah-Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 (KKM 2012). Kaedah tersebut memperuntukkan seperti berikut: "At the hearing of any appeal, fresh evidence shall not be admitted unless the Judge is satisfied that: [a] at the hearing in Subordinate Court, the evidence was not available to the party seeking to use it or that reasonable diligence would not have made it so available; and [b] the fresh evidence, if true, would have had or would have been likely to have a determining influence upon the decision of the Subordinate Court.
Judges (1)
Counsel (8)
Case Significance
1. ) RASHYTTEREN A/L KATHIRASEN 2. ) VETRIIVHELL A/L SARAVANAN v 1. ) LONPAC ... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated February 4, 2025 (citation: pa-12b-22-05-2024). The case was decided by Rozana binti Ali Yusoff.
What was the outcome of 1. ) RASHYTTEREN A/L KATHIRASEN 2. ) VETRIIVHELL A/L SARAVANAN v 1. ) LONPAC ...?
1. ) RASHYTTEREN A/L KATHIRASEN 2. ) VETRIIVHELL A/L SARAVANAN v 1. ) LONPAC ... is a High Court decision dated February 4, 2025. The case was heard by Rozana binti Ali Yusoff. See the full judgment for details.
Statutes Cited
Rules of Court 2012
Cases Cited (5)
MY (5)
[1970] 2 MLJ 70 [2001] 4 CLJ 73 [2004] 4 CLJ 282 [2004] 4 MLJ 105 [2009] 6 CLJ 103
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (pa-12b-22-05-2024)