Court DecisionMY-HC

WA-22NCvC-547-08/2021

Abd Hakim Bin Mohad @ Mohamad Ramli & 44 Oths v 1. ) Shaftsbury Avenue Sdn Bhd (WA-22NCvC-547-08/2021)

High Court of Malaysia13 Apr 2022

The written judgment as the court issued it, with the coram, case number, and source links. Every paragraph has its own anchor.

Open official source PDF Report an issue

Content

1 DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA BAHAGIAN SIVIL NO. GUAMAN SIVIL : WA-22NCVC-547-08/2021

Antara

ABD HAKIM BIN MOHAD @ MOHAMAD RAMLI

(no. K/P: 720710-01-5473)

ABDUL JAMIL BIN AHMAD ZAMAN

(no. K/P: 870217-14-5753)

SRI VALLI A/P SUPPIAH

(no. K/P: 700404-01-5602)

ANIZA @ KHATIJAH BINTI MOHD ZAIN

(no. K/P: 671116-01-5296)

ZURAIDAH BINTI ABDUL MUTALIB (MENUNTUT SEBAGAI ISTERI YANG SAH DAN TANGGUNGAN SERTA PENTADBIR HARTA PUSAKA KEPADA AZAMIN BIN ABU

Sujak, Simati)

AZHAR BIN ABDUL HAMID

(no. K/P: 640101-01-5005)

AZLIN BIN AZIZ

(no. K/P: 640609-05-5307)

CHAN HWEI LING, VIVIAN

(no. K/P: 880307-14-5174)

CHUA PEI SING

(no. Id Singapura : S8279968)

CHUI YOK CHAN

(no. K/P: 610904-06-5324)

DAVID A/L ROWBIN

(no. K/P: 760822-03-5117)

DEVANDRAN A/L K. SIVASUBRAMANIAM

(no. K/P: 660811-71-5063)

DEVATHU A/L D. JACOB

(no. K/P: 611106-07-5223)

ESTHER YANMANI A/P SAMYVELOO

(no. K/P: 630907-08-6428)

WAN SHAH BANIASHRAFIAH BINTI WAN HUSIN

(no. K/P: 691014-03-5358)

FONG WAI SUM (NO. K/P: 681120-08-5712) 03/06/2022 09:26:14

WA-22NCvC-547-08/2021

Kand. 40

HOO FOO SON

(no. K/P: 860611-38-7049)

JURAIMI BIN MASOOD

(no. K/P: 620331-01-5977)

KANG HIAN BENG

(no. K/P: 590525-04-5205)

KOAY CHIN AIK (NO. K/P: 581002-09-5049 21. KODISVARAN A/L JAYARAMAN

(no. K/P: 880326-08-6405)

LIEW YAW SHUNG

(no. Id Singapura: S8376767g)

LOO KAH BOON

(no. K/P: 600928-11-5016)

LOW KWONG MENG

(no. K/P: 620328-10-6763)

WAN ISMAHAIZAL BIN ISMAIL

(no. K/P: 860923-59-5269)

MOHD ZAIDI BIN YUSOFF

(no. K/P: 770510-03-6697)

MONALIZA BINTI MOHAMMAD DIAH

(no. K/P: 640929-05-5242)

MUHAMMAD KAMAL BIN ZAHARI

(no. K/P: 770617-14-5789)

ZURAIDAH BINTI ABDUL MUTALIB

(no. K/P: 690128-01-5684)

NORIZAN BIN HASHIM

(no. K/P: 630408-71-5509)

NUR AZWEENA BINTI AZHAR

(no. K/P: 910404-06-5154)

NUR ELIANIE BINTI AZHAR

(no. K/P: 940117-06-5108)

ROS AIZA BINTI MOHD MOKHTAR

(no. K/P: 741010-06-5384)

ROSLINAWATI BINTI CHOK

(no. K/P: 860506-33-5044)

ROSNA BINTI NORDIN (NO. K/P: 631027-02-5154 36. ROSNAH A/P CHOK

(no. K/P: 751130-06-5396)

RUSNI BINTI NOORDIN

(no. K/P: 660312-02-5682)

ROSLI BIN HAMID

(no. K/P: 600202-04-05215)

SHANTI A/P K SIVASUBRAMANIAM

(no. K/P: 620313-10-5776)

SITI FARAH AZWIN BINTI ABD KHALID

(no. K/P: 890828-05-5376)

S VESANTHA A/P SUPPIAH

(no. K/P: 610121-01-5224)

VANI A/P SUBRAMANIAM

(no. K/P: 741007-02-5592)

WAN AZNI BINTI WAN HASSAN

(no. K/P: 591114-03-5154)

WAN NAIMAH BINTI WAN DAUD

(no. K/P: 630323-03-5096)

ANANTHA KRISHNA A/L SIVASUBRAMANIAM (NO. K/P: 830927-01-5439) [KESEMUA MENYAMAN DALAM KAPASITI PERIBADI DAN/ATAU JUGA SEBAGAI WAKIL KEPADA KESEMUA EMPAT-PULUH LIMA (45) PEMBELI UNIT DI BAWAH PROJEK PEMBANGUNAN BERCAMPUR YANG DIKENALI SEBAGAI “SHAFTSBURY AVENUE” DI ATAS HARTANAH YANG DIPEGANG DI BAWAH HSD 12812 PT 14192 PRESINT 1, (DAHULUNYA DIKENALI SEBAGAI GERAN 777 LOT NO. 5 KEPADA GERAN 780 LOT NO. 8), PRESINT 1, PUTRAJAYA, DAERAH PUTRAJAYA, NEGERI WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN PUTRAJAYA.] …PLAINTIF-PLAINTIF

Dan

SHAFTSBURY AVENUE SDN BHD (DAHULU DIKENALI SEBAGAI SHAFTSBURY RESOURCES SDN BHD) (NO. SYARIKAT:

199701006694 (422190-H)

AR. LATIPAH BT. ABU (ARKITEK) (NO. PENDAFTARAN LAM; A/L 236 BERAMAL DAN BERGAYA DI BAWAH L.A ARCHITECT …DEFENDAN-DEFENDAN

Judgment

Introduction

The Plaintiffs filed this claim as a representative action to claim for liquidated damages for the late delivery of the apartments developed by the 1st Defendant.

The Issue

Although in the Court’s view representative actions are allowed under the Rules of Court 2012 (“the Rule’) the Court applying its inherent jurisdiction raised the issue of whether the sums claimed by each Plaintiff be added to bring it within the jurisdiction of the High Court.

The Decision of the Court

It is trite law that the hierarchy of the Trial Courts in civil cases is based on the monetary jurisdiction of each hierarchy of courts. The monetary jurisdiction of the High Court has been fixed for monetary claims exceeding RM 1 million ringgit.

Although the Plaintiffs are allowed to bring representative actions their monetary claim is restricted to their individual sums based on the date of delivery of the vacant possession.

None of their individual claims exceed the jurisdiction of the High Court. This fact was brought to the notice of the parties. The parties tacitly agreed that the individual claims did not exceed the jurisdiction of the High Court and both sides agreed for the case to be struck out to be filed again in the Sessions Court.

In view of this the Court used its discretion to strike out the Plaintiffs claim but with a liberty to file afresh in the court of the proper jurisdiction.

This in no way prejudiced the Plaintiffs claim as they could now pursue the matter in the proper forum. No doubt the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the case but to do so would be tantamount to an abuse of the process of court.

Conclusion

The Court in striking out the Plaintiffs claim with liberty to file afresh also directed that all pending interlocutory applications also be heard when the case is filed at the proper forum. Dated: 1.6.2022 sgd DATO’ HAJI AKHTAR BIN TAHIR Judge High Court of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur PARTIES: For the Plaintiff: Tetuan Hakem Arabi & Associates Suite No. 8-15-2 Tingkat 15 Menara Mutiara Bangsa Jalan Liku Off Jalan Riong 59100 Kuala Lumpur For the Defendant: Tetuan Arthur Wang Lian & Associates Unit No. 568-9-10, 9-11 & 9-12 9th Floor Kompleks Mutiara 3 ½ miles Jalan Ipoh 51200 Kuala Lumpur

Tetuan Sidek Teoh Wong & Dennis

Level 16 Menara Bumiputra-Commerce

No. 11 Jalan Raja Laut 50350 Kuala Lumpur

Something wrong on this page?

Wrong text, a broken link, out-of-date content, or a removal request — tell us and we'll check it against the official source.

Report an issue Request removal

Malaysian judgment

Case metadata

Court: High Court of Malaysia
Decision date: 13 Apr 2022
Case number: WA-22NCvC-547-08/2021
Coram: YA Dato' Haji Akhtar Bin Tahir
Practice area: The Plaintiffs filed this claim as a representative action to claim for liquidated damages for the late delivery of the apartments developed by the 1st Defendant
Version: Alasan Penghakiman 1
Published: 3 Jun 2022
Source ID: e6226204-b8c5-490f-b534-bb9b34e6c9a1

Catchwords

The Plaintiffs filed this claim as a representative action to claim for liquidated damages for the late delivery of the apartments developed by the 1st Defendant

Parties

ABD HAKIM BIN MOHAD @ MOHAMAD RAMLI & 44 OTHS - plaintiff - ejudgment_parties
1. ) SHAFTSBURY AVENUE SDN BHD - defendant - ejudgment_parties
2. ) AR. LATIPAH BT ABU (ARKITEK) (telah tarik balik tindakan, di Intitulment Kand 8) - defendant - ejudgment_parties

Primary source

Compare this reader text against the official judgment source.

Open source PDF