Ranjit Kaur
About Ranjit Kaur
Ranjit Kaur appears as counsel of record in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2025–2026). These were heard before MYHC (3).
On the court record
Engages the discipline of discovery against "fishing expeditions", the oppression jurisdiction under section 346 of the Companies Act 2016, and interlocutory injunctions in shareholder control disputes.
Ranjit Kaur's appearances in this corpus are in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and centre on civil procedure and company law. As counsel for a defendant she acted on an application for the discovery of documents, where the court worked through the requirements for such an order: whether the documents sought were specific and identified, whether they were relevant, necessary and would save costs, and whether they existed and were in the possession of the opposing party. The court also had to decide whether the application was in truth a "fishing expedition" — an attempt to trawl for material in the hope of finding a case rather than to obtain identified documents relevant to a defined issue. Discovery of that impermissible kind is refused, and the case illustrates the discipline the court applies before compelling production.
She also appeared in linked proceedings concerning a corporate control dispute. On one side of the litigation she acted for a defendant resisting an oppression claim, where the court considered — under section 346 of the Companies Act 2016 and the striking-out powers in Order 18 rule 19 and Order 92 rule 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 — whether majority shareholders could bring an oppression claim, and whether the proceedings represented premature judicial intervention or a short-cut mechanism advanced without adequate pleaded justification, such as to be scandalous, frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process. The court's concern was to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and collateral litigation.
In the related action she acted for plaintiffs seeking an interim injunction, where the questions were whether there was a bona fide serious issue to be tried, whether the defendant was entitled to retain a majority shareholding, and whether an extraordinary general meeting convened to remove the board could be restrained, the company's affairs being said to be in deadlock. Across these matters, Ranjit Kaur's practice engages discovery, the oppression jurisdiction and interlocutory injunctions in shareholder disputes.
How many cases has Ranjit Kaur appeared in?
Ranjit Kaur appears as counsel of record in 3 reported Malaysia judgments (2025–2026).
Which courts does Ranjit Kaur appear in?
Ranjit Kaur appears before MYHC (3).
How did the court treat the discovery application?
It applied the requirements for discovery — that the documents be specific, identified, relevant, necessary and cost-saving, and shown to exist and be in the opposing party's possession — and considered whether the application was an impermissible "fishing expedition".
What company-law questions arose in the linked proceedings?
Whether majority shareholders could bring an oppression claim under section 346 of the Companies Act 2016, whether the proceedings were premature or an abuse of process liable to be struck out, and whether an extraordinary general meeting to remove the board could be restrained by injunction where the company was in deadlock.