BALAKRISHNA BALARAVI PILLAI v PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD

aa-12b-38-10-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 2 April 2025 • AA-12B-38-10/2023 • 13 min read
7 cases cited (0 SG, 7 foreign)

Outcome

Therefore, the plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed with costs of RM2000.00.310.

Quoted verbatim from the judgment of High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) (aa-12b-38-10-2023). Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal for the complete decision.

Catchwords

CIVIL PROCEDURE: Appeal – Whether Sessions Court’s findings ought to be disturbed – Whether findings were against the weight of evidence – Plaintiff failed to identify object struck or prove existence of hazard – Patrol records unshaken – Whether defendant proved reasonable system of inspection TORT: Negligence – Highway concessionaire – Alleged collision with foreign object on expressway – Whether defendant failed to remove or detect hazard – No evidence of object – No photographs or forensic support – Plaintiff’s evidence inconsistent and speculative – Whether breach of duty established – Whether strict liability applies EVIDENCE: Burden of proof – Plaintiff failed to prove existence of object or defendant’s knowledge – No call logs or corroboration of PLUSline report –Burden lies on plaintiff to prove negligence

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Moses Susayan Delivered

Counsel (4)

Athi & Seelan Firm Krish Mano & Associates Firm Athithan a/l Singaravelu Counsel Respondent Balakrishna Balaravi Pillai Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

PROJEK LEBUHRAYA USAHASAMA BERHAD Respondent Balakrishna Balaravi Pillai Appellant

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (7)

UK (1)
[1968] 1 WLR 1490
MY (6)
[1997] 3 MLRH 226 [1997] 4 CLJ 54 [2010] 10 MLRH 391 [2011] 10 CLJ 679 [2021] 6 MLRH 179 [2021] MLJU 1632

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (aa-12b-38-10-2023)