rayuan sivil no. w-02-562-2009 antara 1. s. ashok kandiah 2. tetuan ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AFFIDAVIT I, LEE KWYE LAN WITNESS STATEMENT 1 Q: DO YOU RECALL HAVING RECEIVED ANY TELEPHONE CALL A: Yes FROM ANYONE ON OR ABOUT 13/8/1999 ENQUIRING OF A MR ALVENTHIREN NAIR. 2 Q: DID THE CALLER IDENTIFY HIMSELF? A: No 3 Q: WHAT WAS HE WANTING TO KNOW? A: He was wanting to know of Mr Alventhiren Nair whether he is in the employ of Dato Ramalingams office. 4 Q: WHAT WAS YOUR ANSWER? A: My answer was that there was no such person employed in the office. 5 Q: WHAT WAS YOUR REASON FOR SAYING THIS? A: The reason was simply because in the Office, I am the sole Affirmed by LEE KWYE LAN employee as Secretary of Dato Ramalingam. This PLAINTIFFS WITNESS STATEMENT .is filed by 18
In the above circumstances, we are unanimous that the defence of justification must prevail, as the truth of the sting has been established by the irrefutable evidence in Court. The trial judge was clearly wrong in his finding of fact and his failure to critically examine the evidence in its totality. The appeal is accordingly allowed, with costs to the appellants, fixed at RM25,000/- here and below. The order of the High Court Judge is set aside. All sums of money paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs are to be repaid with interest at 8% per annum. Deposit refunded to appellants. ( DATO’ NIHRUMALA SEGARA A/L M.K. PILLAY ) Judge Court of Appeal PUTRAJAYA Peguam Perayu: Tetuan Shook Lin & Bok Peguambela & Peguamcara Tingkat 20, Bangunan Kumpulan Ambank 55 Jalan Raja Chulan 50200 KUALA LUMPUR Peguam Responden: Tetuan Ghazi & Lim Peguambala & Peguamcara Tingkat 12, Unit 8 Wisma MPL, Jalan Raja Chulan 50200 KUALA LUMPUR 16 March 2010 19
Page 1 and 2: DALAM MAHKAMAH RAYUAN MALAYSIA 1. S
Page 3 and 4: Malaysia. His office address was at
Page 5 and 6: VOUCHER COUNCIL OF JUSTICES OF THE
Page 7 and 8: I did not employ the 2 nd plaintiff
Page 9 and 10: was seated in the 2 nd row of the B
Page 11 and 12: and the Sessions Court Judge reserv
Page 13 and 14: ) that you and Mr Alvinthiren had k
Page 15 and 16: (i) that you and Mr Alvinthiren had
Page 17: Alvinthiren has misled the Court (b

rayuan sivil no. w-02-562-2009 antara 1. s. ashok kandiah 2. tetuan ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?