The case of the woman who trusted too much
My client is a woman in her sixties whose only fault was trusting her family. In 2016 she placed RM1.2 million in her then-daughter-in-law's name to help her secure a housing loan, on the understanding that the money would be returned once the loan was approved. The daughter in law (the Defendant) failed to inform my client that the loan was rejected, and quietly moved the money without my client's knowledge. She also then moved out of the family home with the defendant's ex-husband (the Plaintiff's son). In a judgment dated 20th April 2026, after nearly five years of litigation, the Shah Alam High Court ordered the Defendant to return to my client RM900,000.00 (my client conceded that RM300,000.00 had been transferred to the Defendant's ex-husband (the Plaintiff's son).
The defence ran a counterclaim that, if successful, would have left my client unable to recover anything. The Defendant claimed that the entire RM1.2 million had been moved on to the ex-husband. My client was repeatedly invited by the Defendant to withdraw her claim. A judge who attempted to mediate the case invited my client to walk away from the claim since it was all in the family. Through it all my client stood fast and persevered.
The defence relied on volumes of bank statements showing money moving from various accounts to the Defendant's ex-husband.
When I tell people about my job as a litigation lawyer, I hardly ever talk about the forensic work that we have to do when we prepare for a case. In this case, just compiling and finalising the bundle of documents took my team months. I spent days sifting, analysing and poring through every page and was rewarded when I discovered that there was no money trail from the RM1.2 million. I then had to show the Court through the documents that though there was a trail of money going out, there was nothing to establish that the money going out was from the RM1.2 million.
Under cross-examination, the Defendant admitted she had moved the funds urgently after the housing loan was rejected, because her ex-husband (allegedly) feared my client would ask for the money back. We used her admission to establish that her conduct was incompatible with a gift. The Defendant and her witness admitted also that there was no evidence to show that the monies paid to the ex-husband were from the RM1.2 million.
Under cross-examination, the Defendant admitted she had moved the funds urgently after the housing loan was rejected, because her ex-husband (allegedly) feared my client would ask for the money back. We used her admission to establish that her conduct was incompatible with a gift. The Defendant and her witness admitted also that there was no evidence to show that the monies paid to the ex-husband were from the RM1.2 million.
At the end of the Defendant's case, we took a plea of no case to answer, to the counterclaim.
Though my client testified through a Tamil interpreter, she did not waver under cross-examination, and the judgment records this.
Much thanks to my team, especially Eisyarmily Akhtar, who appeared with me throughout the trial, and to YA Jamhirah Ali J, who was sitting in Shah Alam at the time, for a careful and thorough judgment. Note: the defendant has appealed against the decision.
Though my client testified through a Tamil interpreter, she did not waver under cross-examination, and the judgment records this.
Much thanks to my team, especially Eisyarmily Akhtar, who appeared with me throughout the trial, and to YA Jamhirah Ali J, who was sitting in Shah Alam at the time, for a careful and thorough judgment. Note: the defendant has appealed against the decision.
#muhendaransri #strategydrivenpeoplefocused
#litigationwins
#litigationlawyers
#itsallaboutstrategy
The image is used purely for descriptive purposes and is sourced from the web. Write to us please if you are the owner and wish to be credited.
Comments