KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 13 — The High Court here today dismissed a suit filed by businessman JR Deepak Jaikishan and his brother against Datuk Seri Najib Razak and four others over alleged conspiracy that led to the two brothers and their company, Radiant Splendour Sdn Bhd, to suffer losses.
Judge Datuk Azimah Omar made the ruling after allowing Najib and four other defendants, namely, his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, lawyer Datuk Ahmad Johari Abdul Razak, Datuk Seri Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim (who was then Tabung Haji chairman) and Tan Sri Shukry Mohd Salleh, who was then Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Malaysia Berhad chairman, to strike out the suit filed against them in September 2018.
Lawyer David Mathews, representing Najib and Rosmah, said the court allowed the defendants’ application to strike out the suit on the grounds that the suit, filed by the three plaintiffs, Deepak, 48, Radiant Splendour, and its director J. Rajesh, 47, was unsustainable.
“The court also ordered the plaintiffs to pay RM10,000 in costs to each defendant,” he told reporters after proceedings in chambers before Judge Azimah.
The three plaintiffs were represented by lawyer Nasbal Harun while Ahmad Johari was represented by lawyer Dhinesh Bhasuaran, Abdul Azeez represented by lawyer Prem Ramachandran and lawyer Ng Ying Ci acting on behalf of Shukry.
The five defendants filed an application to strike out the suit on the grounds that it was incomplete, unclear and unverifiable.
In a statement of claim filed on September 12, 2018, the plaintiffs claimed that Najib was acting out of bounds and abusing his power by instructing the Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Berhad to file various legal suits against them, especially Deepak.
Deepak claimed it was to prevent him from testifying in a civil case involving the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu.
The plaintiffs also claimed that on Shukry’s instruction, they signed an agreement, dated July 24, 2008, with Bank Kerjasama Rakyat Berhad, giving up their absolute rights and interest on 80 apartment units at Condominium Palazzio Tower B in return for financing facilities of up to RM198,888,750.
The plaintiffs also claimed all the defendants had committed tort of conspiracy, fraud, malfeasance and abuse of process and seeking each of the defendants to pay RM10 million in general damages, RM2.6 million in exemplary and aggravated damages. — Bernama