CHEW KEA SEW v 1. ) KALIDAS A/L KOMARAWELO 2. ) KASAEVAN A/L MANOHARAN
pa-22ncvc-152-08-2020 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 27 November 2024 • PA-22NCvC-152-08/2020 • 6 min read
Catchwords
Upon hearing the submissions of both parties, I dismissed Plaintiff’s application under Enclosure 57 with no order as to cost. It is trite law that under Order 18, Rule 19 Rules of Court 2012, the Court may at any stage of the proceedings order to be struck out or amended any pleading or the endorsement, of any writ in the action, or anything in any pleading or in the endorsement, on the ground that— [a] it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence, as the case may be; [b] it is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious; [c] it may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of the action; or [d] it is otherwise an abuse of the process of the Court. The main reason the Plaintiff seeks to strike out the Defendant's defence is based on prayer 4 of the Order and due to the First Defendant's failure to comply with the said Order. However, I found that it would be unjust to strike out the First Defendant's defence solely on the grounds that the First Defendant has failed to comply with the Order. More so in a situation where the Plaintiff is already aware that following their application for Summary Judgment, YA Hakim Tun Abdul Majid had decided that it is not a fit case for Summary Judgement to be entered against the Defendants and that the matter should proceed to full trial. This was also affirmed by Court of Appeal.
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
Statutes Cited
Rules of Court 2012
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (pa-22ncvc-152-08-2020)