Ragavan A/L Rajoo v Ignatian Benedict Duraisingham

ba-23cy-7-07-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 12 September 2024 • BA-23CY-7-07/2022 • 25 min read

22 cases cited (0 SG, 22 foreign)

Catchwords

Question of law - O33/O14A - Can the Plaintiff commence and sustain an action on a cause of action in defamation against the Defendant, which is a society pursuant to the provisions of the Societies Act 1966 - the court reformulated the questions and answered all in the affirmative - distinguished the FC case of Lim Lip Eng v Ong Ka Chuan and followed FC decision in Lee Tak Suan & Anor v Tunku Dato Seri Shahabudin Bin Tunku Besar Burhanuddin - a society can sue and be sued in the name of its office bearers - application was dismissed.

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Noor Hayati binti Haji Mat Delivered

Counsel (5)

Haris Ibrahim Kandiah Partnership Firm S. Thilaga Firm Ashok Kandiah Counsel Defendant Mishand Pathmanathan Counsel Defendant Shangeetha a/p Thana Sehgaran Counsel Plaintiff

Parties (2)

Ignatian Benedict Duraisingham Defendant Ragavan a/l Rajoo Plaintiff

Statutes Cited

Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)

Federal Constitution

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (22)

UK (2)

[1998] QB 459 [2007] 1 AC 359

MY (20)

[1965] 1 MLJ 142 [1982] 1 MLJ 186 [1994] 1 CLJ 207 [1995] 2 CLJ 912 [1995] 2 MLJ 493 [2000] 3 CLJ 719 [2000] 3 MLJ 81 [2003] 4 CLJ 337 [2003] 4 CLJ 377 [2003] 5 AMR 696 [2003] 6 AMR 74 [2004] 1 MLJ 8 [2006] 2 MLJ 689 [2011] 6 MLJ 297 [2011] 8 CLJ 766 [2016] 5 MLJ 314 [2016] 8 CLJ 831 [2018] 11 MLJ 585 [2018] 7 CLJ 371 [2024] 2 CLJ 753

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-23cy-7-07-2022)