Ambihathevi v Jeevarajah: Interlocutory Injunction for Property Transfer & Exclusion

In Ambihathevi Alagaretnam Mrs Jeevarajah Ambihathevi v Jeevarajah Nithiananthan, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore granted an interlocutory injunction on 24 June 2021, excluding the defendant, Dr. Nithiananthan, from the property at 23 Carmen Street Singapore 459750. The plaintiff, Mdm Ambihathevi, the sole beneficiary of the property under her late husband's will, sought the injunction to compel the transfer of the property and to exclude her son, Dr. Nithiananthan, from residing there. The court found serious questions to be tried regarding Mdm Ambihathevi's entitlement to the property and her personal safety, leading to the decision to grant the injunction.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Interlocutory injunction granted against the defendant, excluding him from the property.

1.3 Case Type

Civil

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court granted an interlocutory injunction excluding the defendant from a property, pending its transfer to the plaintiff, the sole beneficiary.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Ambihathevi Alagaretnam Mrs Jeevarajah AmbihatheviPlaintiffIndividualInterlocutory injunction grantedWon
Jeevarajah NithiananthanDefendantIndividualInjunction granted against defendantLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Andre ManiamJudicial CommissionerYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Eva Teh Jing HuiK&L Gates Straits Law LLP
Narayanan SreenivasanK&L Gates Straits Law LLP
Liyana SinwanK&L Gates Straits Law LLP
Palaniappan SundararajK&L Gates Straits Law LLP
Samuel ChackoLegis Point LLC
Joanna Karolina KorycinskaLegis Point LLC
Anne-Marie JohnLegis Point LLC

4. Facts

  1. Mdm Ambihathevi is the sole beneficiary of the Property under the will of her late husband.
  2. Dr Nithiananthan is Mdm Ambihathevi’s son and the executor and trustee of the will.
  3. The Property has not been transferred to Mdm Ambihathevi.
  4. Dr Nithiananthan claims he is not obliged to transfer the Property and can retain it as the family home.
  5. Mdm Ambihathevi moved out of the Property due to concerns about Dr Nithiananthan's behavior.
  6. Mdm Ambihathevi filed for a PPO and DEO in the Family Justice Courts.
  7. Dr Nithiananthan disputes Mdm Ambihathevi’s mental capacity.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Ambihathevi Alagaretnam Mrs Jeevarajah Ambihathevi v Jeevarajah Nithiananthan, Originating Summons No 410 of 2021 (Summons No 2536 of 2021), [2021] SGHC 161

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Mr Jeevarajah passed away
Grant of probate was issued
Mdm Ambihathevi moved out of the Property
Mdm Ambihathevi filed an application in the Family Justice Courts for a personal protection order and a domestic exclusion order
An expedited order was granted restraining Dr Nithiananthan from using family violence against Mdm Ambihathevi
Mdm Ambihathevi filed Originating Summons No 410 of 2021
The FJC application was mentioned
Mdm Ambihathevi filed the summons for an interlocutory injunction to exclude Dr Nithiananthan from the Property
Dr Nithiananthan filed Summons No 2693 of 2021 for Mdm Ambihathevi to be medically examined
The injunction application came before the court
Mdm Ambihathevi filed a further affidavit
Dr Nithiananthan be prohibited from entering and/or continuing to remain in occupation of the Property
FJC application fixed for a three-day trial
SUM 2693 has been fixed for hearing

7. Legal Issues

  1. Entitlement to Property Transfer
    • Outcome: The court found that there were serious questions to be tried regarding the plaintiff's entitlement to have the property transferred to her.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Interpretation of will clauses
      • Beneficial ownership
      • Fiduciary duties of executor and trustee
  2. Interlocutory Injunction
    • Outcome: The court granted the interlocutory injunction, finding that the balance of convenience favored allowing the plaintiff to reside at the property and requiring the defendant to leave.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Balance of convenience
      • Risk of injustice
      • High degree of assurance
    • Related Cases:
      • [1992] 2 SLR(R) 1
      • [2017] 2 SLR 997
  3. Mental Capacity
    • Outcome: The court found that there was a serious question to be tried, notwithstanding the issues which Dr Nithiananthan has raised about Mdm Ambihathevi’s mental state.
    • Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Transfer of Property
  2. Interlocutory Injunction to exclude the defendant from the property

9. Cause of Actions

  • Breach of Trust
  • Application for Interlocutory Injunction

10. Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Family Litigation
  • Estate Planning Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Chuan Hong Petrol Station Pte Ltd v Shell Singapore (Pte) LtdCourt of AppealYes[1992] 2 SLR(R) 1SingaporeCited for the principle that the 'high assurance' test is a useful generalization when granting a mandatory injunction, but the court should take whichever course appears to carry the lower risk of injustice.
RGA Holdings International Inc v Loh Choon Phing Robin and anotherCourt of AppealYes[2017] 2 SLR 997SingaporeCited for the principle that the court must be sure that the grant of the interim mandatory injunction is the course of action which carries the lower risk of injustice.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Mental Capacity Act (Cap 177A, 2010 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Interlocutory Injunction
  • Sole Beneficiary
  • Executor
  • Trustee
  • Family Home
  • Mental Capacity
  • Personal Protection Order
  • Domestic Exclusion Order

15.2 Keywords

  • injunction
  • property transfer
  • will
  • trust
  • family dispute
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Injunctions75
Civil Procedure60
Trust Law40
Wills and Probate30
Property Law25

16. Subjects

  • Trusts
  • Wills
  • Property Law
  • Family Violence
  • Civil Procedure