1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN VISTA KIARA 2. ) KARNIK NIRAJ SHRIKANT 3. ) MAK SUI HOON 4. ) ADRIAN FITZGERALD GOVES 5. ) CHIA E MAN 6. ) ANUJ KAPOOR 7. ) VIJAY KANTIBHAI v Tan Ye Wai
Catchwords
Introduction 1. The learned Sessions Judge after a full trial allowed the Plaintiff’s claim for libel against the Defendants and ordered the Defendants to pay damages to the Plaintiff. The Defendants now appeal against this decision of the learned Session Judge. The brief facts 2. The Plaintiff’s claim stemmed from an article defaming her published using the official e mail of the 1st Defendant which was the Management Body of a residence called the Vista Kiara Condominium. The other Defendants were the committee members of the 1st Defendant. 3. The Plaintiff apart from being the resident at the condominium was a member of a financial task force appointed by the 1st Defendant. The defamatory statement against the Plaintiff were contained in an e mail entitled “IMPORTANT- A MUST READ FOR OWNERS OF PPVK” and published in the official email of the 1st Defendant and sent to all the residents of the condominium. 4. The email denoted the Plaintiff as the cause of disharmony and chaos amongst the residents of the condominium. The email also labelled the Plaintiff as carrying out activities serving her own interest. The e mail further denoted the Plaintiff as a criminally inclined. 4. The Defendants in their defense contended that it was the statutory duty of the Defendants to rectify and correct any issues arising which might lead to a detriment to the peaceful enjoyment of the condominium by all the residents of the condominium. Conclusion 21. In the upshot the Court dismissed the Defendants’ appeal with a cost of RM5,000.
Practice Areas
Introduction 1. The learned Sessions Judge after a full trial allowed the Plaintiff’s claim for libel against the Defendants and ordered the Defendants to pay damages to the Plaintiff. The Defendants now appeal against this decision of the learned Session Judge. The brief facts 2. The Plaintiff’s claim stemmed from an article defaming her published using the official e mail of the 1st Defendant which was the Management Body of a residence called the Vista Kiara Condominium. The other Defendants were the committee members of the 1st Defendant. 3. The Plaintiff apart from being the resident at the condominium was a member of a financial task force appointed by the 1st Defendant. The defamatory statement against the Plaintiff were contained in an e mail entitled “IMPORTANT- A MUST READ FOR OWNERS OF PPVK” and published in the official email of the 1st Defendant and sent to all the residents of the condominium. 4. The email denoted the Plaintiff as the cause of disharmony and chaos amongst the residents of the condominium. The email also labelled the Plaintiff as carrying out activities serving her own interest. The e mail further denoted the Plaintiff as a criminally inclined. 4. The Defendants in their defense contended that it was the statutory duty of the Defendants to rectify and correct any issues arising which might lead to a detriment to the peaceful enjoyment of the condominium by all the residents of the condominium. Conclusion 21. In the upshot the Court dismissed the Defendants’ appeal with a cost of RM5,000.
Judges (1)
Case Significance
1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN VISTA KIARA 2. ) KARNIK NIRAJ SHRIKANT 3. ) MAK SU... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated April 22, 2025 (citation: wa-12bncvc-4-01-2025). The case was decided by Akhtar bin Tahir.
Key issues: Introduction.
What was the outcome of 1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN VISTA KIARA 2. ) KARNIK NIRAJ SHRIKANT 3. ) MAK SU...?
1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN VISTA KIARA 2. ) KARNIK NIRAJ SHRIKANT 3. ) MAK SU... is a High Court decision dated April 22, 2025. The case was heard by Akhtar bin Tahir. See the full judgment for details.