Kumaradevan Rajadevan

On the court record

A civil-litigation practice in contract, medical negligence and insurance disputes across the High Court and Court of Appeal.

Kumaradevan Rajadevan practises in civil litigation across the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan), appearing mostly as plaintiff's counsel but also as defendant, respondent and appellant in the reported decisions. The caseload is a broad commercial and tort mix: contract disputes turning on the construction of a letter of offer and other agreements, medical-negligence claims — including one resolved on the effect of a settlement agreement — and insurance-contract disputes over the scope of cover and the insurer's liability.

A recurring theme is the integrity of a judgment or agreement. The reported matters include an allegation that a judgment was obtained by fraud, which raises the exceptional grounds on which a concluded decision may be reopened, and disputes over whether a settlement compromises the underlying claim. There is also land-related litigation and an appeal involving a major airport operator, so the practice reaches both private contractual disputes and matters with a substantial institutional counterparty.

The work is fact-intensive and evidentiary. In the negligence claims the argument turns on breach of the applicable standard of care and on causation; in the contract and insurance matters it turns on the words of the instrument and the parties' dealings; and in the fraud allegation it turns on the strict requirements for setting aside a judgment. Across the different case types the common feature is the careful construction of documents and the marshalling of evidence to prove or resist a civil claim.

The overall profile is a general civil and commercial litigation practice, weighted toward contract, professional negligence and insurance, conducted at trial and on appeal. The reported reasons turn on the interpretation of agreements, the standard of care in negligence, and the finality of judgments and settlements, rather than on any criminal or regulatory element, marking a practice grounded in private-law dispute resolution.