P. SARASWATI A/P S. PERIASAMY v MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD

ja-25-20-08-2022 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 17 September 2025 • JA-25-20-08/2022 • 16 min read

17 cases cited (0 SG, 17 foreign)

Catchwords

Administrative Law – Judicial remedies – Judicial review - Function of High Court when dealing with applications for judicial review - Whether High Court may act as an appeal court – Whether the Applicant’s judicial review application complies with the mandatory requirements under Order 53 of the Rules of Court 2012 – Whether the Industrial Court committed any jurisdictional error, error of law, or procedural impropriety justifying judicial intervention – Whether the Court is being invited to impermissibly re-evaluate the merits of the Industrial Court’s findings

Practice Areas

Administrative Law

Judges (1)

Wong Mee Ling Delivered

Counsel (5)

Steven Thiru & Sudhar Partnership Firm V.M. Muthu & Co Firm Adrienna Sena Counsel Respondent Janice Loo Counsel Respondent V M Muthu Counsel Applicant

Parties (2)

MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD Respondent P. Saraswati a/p S. Periasamy Applicant

Case Significance

P. SARASWATI A/P S. PERIASAMY v MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated September 17, 2025 (citation: ja-25-20-08-2022). <p>The applicant, a former Head of Business Centre at Malayan Banking, sought judicial review to quash an Industrial Court award upholding her dismissal for misconduct involving irregularities in credit facilities totalling over RM95 million. The court found the applicant failed to comply with Order 53 Rule 3(2), failed to join the Industrial Court as a necessary party, and failed to demonstrate any reviewable error. The judicial review application was dismissed as the court cannot re-evaluate t The case was decided by Wong Mee Ling. Counsel appearing: Adrienna Sena (counsel for respondent), Janice Loo (counsel for respondent), V M Muthu (counsel for applicant).

Summary

The applicant, a former Head of Business Centre at Malayan Banking, sought judicial review to quash an Industrial Court award upholding her dismissal for misconduct involving irregularities in credit facilities totalling over RM95 million. The court found the applicant failed to comply with Order 53 Rule 3(2), failed to join the Industrial Court as a necessary party, and failed to demonstrate any reviewable error. The judicial review application was dismissed as the court cannot re-evaluate the merits of the Industrial Court's factual findings.

What was the outcome of P. SARASWATI A/P S. PERIASAMY v MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD?

<p>The applicant, a former Head of Business Centre at Malayan Banking, sought judicial review to quash an Industrial Court award upholding her dismiss...

Statutes Cited

Industrial Relations Act 1967 (Cap 177)

s 20

Rules of Court 2012

Cases Cited (17)

UK (8)

[1942] 1 All ER 97 [1942] AC 332 [1947] 2 All ER 680 [1948] 1 KB 223 [1952] 1 All ER 122 [1952] 1 KB 338 [1982] 1 WLR 1155 [1985] AC 374

MY (9)

[1967] 1 MLJ 101 [1991] 1 MLJ 417 [1995] 2 CLJ 748 [1997] 1 CLJ 147 [2008] 5 MLJ 717 [2012] 3 MLJ 149 [2019] 3 MLJ 749 [2019] 4 CLJ 561 [2022] MLJU 2197