TYCOON and philanthropist Datuk Vinod Sekhar's vindication begins in the first day of trial with significant wins, including being awarded costs totalling RM60,000 against a group of plaintiffs who also had a major portion of their application struck off.
The proceedings on Monday saw the plaintiffs' attempt to amend a ‘claim’ on an investment purportedly made some 20 years ago which now has been rejected by the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday along with it ordering the 12 parties pay RM5,000 in costs each.
The suit, initiated by a group of twelve foreign investors, who alleged that the chairman of the Malaysian conglomerate Petra Group, did not comply to what was seemingly agreed to between the years 2004 and 2007, to which a legal analyst says the use of the word fraud in the case was merely a means to go against time barring based on the statute of limitations.
The plaintiffs further alleged that the tycoon and philanthropist conspired to perpetuate the same misconduct and are seeking the return of their funds, along with interest, damages, and other reliefs.
But, strangely, out of the 12 plaintiffs, only one party showed up in court on Monday.
Defence counsel Datuk Seri Rajan Navaratnam then applied to strike out nearly half of the witness statement submitted by the plaintiffs’ principal witness, Graham David Bell, describing large sections as irrelevant and inadmissible to a claim which is less than US250,000.
“These are very pertinent facts (in Bell’s witness statement) which were not in the statement of claim, which means they could not have been addressed at the (defendants’) statement of defence,” Rajan submitted before Judicial Commissioner Muhammad Adam @ Edward Abdullah.
“Having not pleaded it and having not addressed it at the statement of defence, I’m robbed of the opportunity to cross-examine these facts. This makes so-called facts purported ‘junk’ ”
Bell, a 66-year-old British investor and managing partner of Bridge Partners FZE, is the only plaintiff to have appeared in person to give evidence on Monday.
His testimony sought to claim that he made investments into Petra Equities Sdn Bhd, a Petra Group company with only two employees to which the defence counsel had proof that that there were no monies transferred into Sekhar’s account.
On the stand, Bell struggled to keep his composure while Rajan went through a line of questioning to the extent that Rajan said: “Don’t be rude, if you do not want to be here, you can leave.”
Sources have said that the managing partner of Bridge Partners FZE has been described by acquaintances in Malaysia as a Dubai based wheeler dealer. They also were surprised as he had according to the acquaintance reached out to Sekhar for help in meeting people here only years ago.
Separately, in a podcast interview in "the GoodCast show" the billionaire industrialist when asked about the case had said that it was interesting that after nearly 20 years a group would sue while he was in the middle of heart transplant and when the government had changed to one he was an open supporter of.
"I leave it those smart enough to work out their intentions". He added "I trust the courts and will have my day. And after that I will do what is necessary to remind people I am in fact alive well and ready".
Graham Bell's claim is less than USD250,000.
During the course of questioning, the court heard that close to half of what was alleged by the plaintiffs were simply not true and debunked.
According to Bell, the plaintiffs were “similarly unaware” of Sekhar’s alleged financial difficulties and would not have proceeded with their investments had they known.
Under cross-examination, Bell conceded that several portions of his statement – including claims relating to companies such as Green Rubber Sdn Bhd, Sekhar Assets Sdn Bhd and GR Technologies Sdn Bhd – had not been pleaded in the original statement of claim, a fact seized upon by the defence.
A source said the purported claim related to an alleged investment made in 2004 is being claimed now (some 20 years later) and this happened during the global financial crisis and due to Sekhar rejecting all avenues for settlement to the baseless claim.
The court also noted that at the material time to which the allegations were made, Sekhar was undergoing a heart transplant.
The KL High Court will continue to hear defence counsel’s moves to strike out key portions of investor testimony after the plaintiffs’ attempt to amend claims had been rejected.
The hearing resumes today before Judicial Commissioner Datuk Muhammad Adam. - October 7, 2025
.jpg)
