JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI IS A CRIMINAL !

MALAYSIAN COURTS ARE “BOTH” COURTS OF LAW & EQUITY !

I had earlier ( my last post) posted an opinion that Judge Zainon HAVING AWARDED TO RESPONDENTS, security for costs in the sum of Rm.60,000 cannot then still have JUDICIAL AUTHORITY TO FURTHER GO ON AND approve TO RESPONDENT STEPHEN LIM CHENG BAN a second application for STRIKING OUT OF PETITION while the first Order for security for costs is still “ALIVE” because they “repel each other”, they strike each other out; therefore THEY ARE A NONSENSE !

I will now go on and couch my argument in LEGAL TERMS. I had in my earlier post said that judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s order for security for costs constituted an agreement among the three parties, judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali of the 1st part, Petitioner of the 2nd part, and Respondents of the 3rd part. THE AGREEMENT AMONG THE THREE PARTIES, BEING that upon the payment by petitioner of the sum of Rm.60,000 as security for costs under the Order made by judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, the three parties will proceed to try the PETITION. This in fact was an undertaking by the three parties as I will analyse this argument below.

Allow me to remind readers (who are mostly lawyers) that the COURTS of Malaysia, like the courts of England, USA & THE COMMONWEALTH ARE ALL COURTS OF LAW & EQUITY; and having said that both judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali & Respondent Stephen Lim Cheng Ban CANNOT “WILLY” “NILLY” go on to breach their agreement; in the case of Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, he will be in breach of the agreement by REFUSING TO PROCEED TO TRIAL BY OBTAINING judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s order to strike out petition. On the part of Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, she will be in breach for awarding to Stephen Lim Cheng Ban, the order TO STRIKE OUT SAID PETITION. I also have to ADMIT THAT A BREACH OF CONTRACT REMEDY LIES IN DAMAGES; but as I had earlier reminded my readers, THAT THE COURTS OF MALAYSIA ARE BOTH COURTS OF LAW & EQUITY; AND THEREFORE HE WHO COMES TO EQUITY MUST COME WITH CLEAN HANDS. Stephen Lim Cheng Ban did not appear before Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali on his application to strike out said petition WITH CLEAN HANDS, and therefore her award of the order to strike out said petition was WRONG and made without the sanction of law & equity.

I had earlier stated that I will argue the rationale for my claim the judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali’s award of security for costs made judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali a party to the said agreement. Respondents asked for the sum of Rm.625,000 as security for costs, and judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali reduced this sum to Rm.60,000, and IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT AGREEMENT IS MADE; respondents accepted the security for costs of Rm.60,000 (money still in their hands & I will move for the A-G’s Dept. to prosecute all the Respondents for obtaining money for false pretences “supporting affidavits carried PERJURIES ), THEY ACCEPTED PETITIONER’S RM.60,000 as adequate security for costs (if they did not their remedy lies in APPEAL and not in applying for a second remedy for striking out). Let me put it mildly so far as the participation of judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali is concerned, that judge Zainon became COMPLICIT upon the award by her of Stephen Lim Cheng Ban’s application for striking out of petition. She compromised herself at the moment that she awarded Stephen Lim the order for striking out of petition. LET ME SAY THAT SHE BECAME A PARTY TO THE AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS BECAUSE PETITIONER PAID THE RM.60,000, pursuant to her reduced sum of Rm.60,000 that upon payment of the said sum, she will hold a trial of the petition.

THIS IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONVICT JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI FOR MALFEASANCE & REMOVAL FROM HER JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT.

COPIES FAXED TO :

(1)ATTORNEY GENERAL, MALAYSIA,
(2)CHIEF JUDGEM TUN FAIROZ,
(3)JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI,
(4)PRESIDENT BAR COUNCIL, MALAYSIA
(5)SECRETARY BAR COUNCIL
(6)RANDOMLY FAXED TO SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE MALAYSIAN BAR.