← 返回新闻首页
马来西亚本地

Businessman loses appeal to claim RM185,671 lottery prize without ticket in Shah Alam court

PETALING JAYA, Oct 19 — A businessman has failed in his bid to recover RM185,671 from Pan Malaysian Pools Sdn Bhd after losing his winning lottery ticket.At the Shah Alam High...

Malay MailMalay Mail查看原文 ↗
商人上诉失败,未能在莎阿南法院领取185,671令吉彩票奖金(无彩票)。

M Mahendravarman's appeal to recover RM185,671 from Pan Malaysian Pools Sdn Bhd was rejected by the Shah Alam High Court after he lost his winning lottery ticket.

Despite lodging a police report and presenting a photograph of the ticket as evidence, the court upheld the Sessions Court's decision, agreeing with the company's requirement for the original ticket to prevent fraud.

Mahendravarman's counsel argued that supporting evidence should suffice, but was overruled, with the court ordering him to pay RM3,000 in costs.

The legal team is considering a further appeal.

PETALING JAYA, Oct 19 — A businessman has failed in his bid to recover RM185,671 from Pan Malaysian Pools Sdn Bhd after losing his winning lottery ticket.

At the Shah Alam High Court today, judicial commissioner Seow Hock Peng dismissed M Mahendravarman’s appeal against a Sessions Court ruling that rejected his claim against the lottery operator, Free Malaysia Today (FMT) reported.

The court also ordered him to pay RM3,000 in costs.

Mahendravarman said he purchased a ticket bearing the numbers 1515 and 1010 for RM30 at a Petaling Jaya outlet on May 14, 2022, and won RM185,671 in the draw. He photographed the ticket but later misplaced it.

He lodged a police report on May 16, 2022 and attempted to claim the prize using the photograph.

The company refused to pay without the original ticket.

According to FMT, during the appeal, counsel R Kengadharan argued that the sessions court had placed undue weight on the missing ticket while overlooking supporting evidence.

He pointed out that the company’s witness confirmed the serial number in the police report matched the photograph of the ticket, and that no one else had produced the original to claim the prize.

Kengadharan cited provisions of the Evidence Act 1950 to support the admission of secondary evidence in cases where original documents are lost.

The company’s lawyer, Shamala Devi Balasundaram, countered that its rules required the original ticket to prevent fraud or duplicate claims.

Kengadharan said he would seek instructions from his client on whether to pursue a further appeal.

Lawyer says eviction bid halted, court order to be sought for Balai Undang Rembau

Poultry farm operator slapped with RM50,000 fine for fly breeding offence

Religious scholars must keep up with advances in science and technology, says Zulkifli

手机左右滑动,电脑按 ← → 键,也能切换新闻