VEERAN A/L AYASAMY v 1. ) CIMB BANK BERHAD 2. ) OOI KEE CHYE
Catchwords
1. In Enclosure 1, the Plaintiff seeks, inter alia, a declaration that the Order of the High Court in Civil Suit No. 22–615–2006 dated 25 August 2011 (“Suit 615”) remains valid and binding, as well as a declaration that the Plaintiff is the true and lawful owner of the land in question, together with other related and consequential reliefs. 2. However, what is before this Court is also the First Defendant’s application in Enclosure 6, filed pursuant to Order 18 rule 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and/or (d) of the Rules of Court 2012 and/or the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, seeking, inter alia, an order that the Plaintiff’s Originating Summons dated 14 October 2025 together with the Supporting Affidavit affirmed on the same date be struck out, with costs of the action and this application to be borne by the Plaintiff. 3. In the circumstances, this Court shall first deal with the First Defendant’s application in Enclosure 6, followed by Enclosure 1. The Core Issues 4. The central question in Enclosure 6 is whether the First Defendant has satisfied this Court that the threshold for striking out has been met. The applicable legal principles governing such an application are well settled. The determination of this question must therefore be considered in light of the facts and the grounds relied upon by the First Defendant in support of its striking out application. 5. The issue in Enclosure 1 is whether, based on the terms of the order in Suit 615, the Plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs as sought against the First Defendant and/or the Second Defendant. 6. The significance of Suit 615, not just in the context of Enclosure 1, but also in the context of the present striking out application will be addressed below.
Judges (1)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (pa-24ncvc-1273-10-2025)