KCH-22NCvC-22/4-2014

Yme Development Sdn. Bhd.

---

Cosmopolitan Harvest Sdn. Bhd. AND OTHERS

Specific performance for breach of the agreement and payment under terms of guarantee

09-11-2015

The Defendants’ application is dismissed with cost of RM2000.00 to be paid forthwith to the Plaintiff.Encl. 19 is now fixed on the 11.12.2015 at 9.00 a.m. Parties are to get ready with the submission and to produce on that day.

KCH-42S-22/5-2015

Nazrul Ain Bin Wahab

---

Public Prosecutor

Appeal against the sentence.

30-10-2015

The case in respect of the 1st Appellant is to be remitted back to the same learned SCJ for retrial & to be produced before the Sesasion Court Judge this afternoon..The 2nd Appellant's appeal is dismissed. The sentence imposed by the learned SCJ is affirmed.

KCH-12B-4/5-2015

Ting Yu Ing @ Ding Yu Ying

---

Goh Tze Nam

Appeal against decisions made after trial

09-10-2015

The appeal is allowed.

KCH-42 AC-1/3-2015

Bahagian Perundangan Dan Pendakwaan

---

Ling Sing Ching

Appeal against decisions made after trial

28-09-2015

For the above reasons, the prosecution's appeal is dismissed. The order of discharge and acquittal given by the learned SCJ are affirmed.

KCH-42S-20/4-2015

Polis Di Raja Malaysia (pdrm) [cawangan Pendakwaan Kuching]

---

Azwan Shah Bin Abdullah

Appeal against decisions made after trial

28-09-2015

In the circumstances of this case, the Appellant's appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed. As these two offences of rape were committed by the Appellant at different place and time, both sentences should run consecutively. As such the sentence of 8 years for each offence of rape is maintained but they are to run consecutively meaning the imprisonment sentence for the second charge would commence upon the expiry of the imprisonment term for the first charge. As for the number of whipping to be given to the Appellant, I would not disturb the order by the learned SCJ.

KCH-43-7/9-2015

DENNIS CHAN CHU LUNG

---

Public Prosecutor

Application for Revision pursuant to S31 Courts of Judicature Act 1964 for Criminal Remand Application No. KCH-89-309/8-2015

23-09-2015

In my view, the prosecution had complied with all the necessary requirements in making this application for remand. I do not see that there was any irregularity of any procedure which could taint the legality of the remand orders. Section 4(!) (A) AND 4(2) (a) only require the above documents to be produced to the Magistrate for an order of remand to be made. The Magistrate may direct the release of the Applicant only if there is non compliance i.e. no such statement produced and there are no ground to detain him. As such, I refuse to exercise my power of revision as the remand orders given by the learned Magistrate were lawful and valid according to the provision of the law. Hence, the application for revision is dismissed.

KCH-13NCvC-4/2-2015

Mohd. Syafiq Abdullah @ Tiong Choo Ting

---

Director Of Jabatan Agama Islam Sarawak AND OTHERS

a) A Declaration that the Applicant is a Christian; b) An Order of Mandamus to compel the 1st and/or 2nd Respondents to issue the Letter of Release from the religion of Islam (“Surat Murtad”) to the Applicant effecting the Applicant’s intention to be released from the religion of Islam; c) An Order of Mandamus to compel the 3rd Respondent to change the Applicant’s name from Mohd. Syafiq Abdullah to Tiong Choo Ting; d) An order of Mandamus to compel the 3rd Respondent to drop the Applicant’s religion Islam in his identity card and/or the records and/or particulars of the Applicant’s religion held at the National Registry to that of Christianity; e) Costs; f) Any further or other relief deems fit and proper by this Honourable Court.

21-09-2015

In court view, apostasy is a subject matter touching on the personal law of persons professing the religion of Islam and as such should be adjudicated by the Syariah Courts. In other words, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to deal with this leave application. This Ruling in Mohd Syafiq Abdullah’s case [KCH-13NCVC-4/2-2015] binds the decision in the two other cases of the same nature of application in Jenny Binti Peter @ Nur Muzdhalifah Abdullah [KCH-13-1/2-2015] and Salina Jau Binti Abdullah [KCH-13NCVC-1/1-2015].No rder as to cost.

KCH-22NCvC-1/1-2015

Bong Ah Loi

---

Zain Azman Bin Sideni

(1) Judgment for RM17,993,000.00, or alternatively, damages to be assessed; (2) Interests at 5% p.a. (a) on the sum of RM450,000.00 from the 2nd October, 2013 to 19th August, 2014, (b) on the sum of RM25,000.00 from the 2nd December, 2013 to 19th August, 2014, and (c) on the sum of RM17,993,000.00 (or damages) from the 26th September, 2014 until the date of judgment, pursuant to S.11 of the Civil Law Act 1951 and thereafter at 5% pa until full and final settlement; (3) Costs on full indemnity basis; and (4) Such further or other reliefs as this Honorable Court deem fit and just.

14-09-2015

The Defendant’s application is dismissed with costs of RM2,000 to the Plaintiff

KCH-24NCvC-13/6-2015

Chong Joon Hui

---

Lee Joo Ho AND OTHERS

Removal of Caveat Extension of Caveat

14-09-2015

The Defendants’ application for extension of time is granted. However, I will order costs of RM500.00 for the Plaintiffs to be paid by the Defendants forthwith. To 15.10.2015 at 9 a.m. for further mention.

KCH-22NCvC-49/7-2014

Gelolilen Anak Jehep

---

Jehom Ak Noyuk AND OTHERS

For a declaration that that the Power of Attorney Instrument (said PAI) created on 2 September 1999 is invalid and void ab initio and remains so till to-date, and continuing, whereby the right share and interest in F/L No. 707 containing 10.797 hectares (22.101 acres), more or less of land (“said land”) situate within the plantation at Kampung Selampit Lundu operated by the 3rd. defendant, has never transfer or been transferred from the1st defendant to the 2nd defendant who is, at all material time, in fact a trespasser/fraudster despite her name is registered as owner of the said land, etc.

09-09-2015

The 1st & 2nd Defendants application ( en 92) is struck out with costs of RM2000.00 to the plaintiff.