KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court has postponed to March 27 to hear the evidence of carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan in the hearing of a suit brought by the family of the late private investigator P. Balasubramaniam against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and seven others.
Judge Datuk Hue Siew Kheng fixed the date after lawyer Tan Sri Dr Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who represented Deepak, told the court that his client was on medical leave for three days Sunday.
Shafee said he was informed by his client this morning about the medical leave which was obtained from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Cheras.
"He (Deepak) came to my office on Saturday and he vomitted in the conference room. He later vomitted in the toilet next to the reception," he said, adding that he had also advised Deepak to see a doctor the same day.
Hue asked for a full medical report to be produced on Deepak's condition at the next hearing on March 27.
On Feb 6, the court allowed an application by Balasubramaniam's widow A. Santamil Selvi and her three children to cross-examine Deepak over the filing of his two conflicting defence in their suit to claim for losses incurred during their stay out of the country for five years from 2008.
In their suit, they had named Najib, his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, Najib’s brothers Mohd Nazim and Johari, lawyers Sunil Abraham, Cecil Abraham and Arulampalam Mariampillai, commissioner for oaths Zainal Abidin Muhayat and Deepak as parties to the action.
Santamil and her children B. Kishen, B. Menaga and B. Reeshi are seeking to claim for losses incurred during their stay in Chennai, India, from July 4, 2008, to March 15, 2013, when Balasubramaniam, 53, died of a heart attack.
In their statement of claim, Santamil said her husband was forced to withdraw his first statutory declaration made on July 1, 2008, pertaining to certain facts in the murder of Mongolian woman, Altantuya Shaariibuu.
She also claimed that her husband, who was appointed as a private investigator in the Altantuya murder case, and her family were thrown out of the country after the revelation of the facts in the case.
They had sought damages including for rental of an apartment in Chennai, India, the children's school fees and her loss of income as a kindergarten teacher, housing loan, transport costs, general damages, special damages and costs.