Murdered Dpp S Will Propounded With Brothers Consent Says Executor

---

 
In September 2015, the body of murdered deputy public prosecutor Kevin Morais was found in a cement-filled oil drum in Subang Jaya, Selangor. (File pic)PETALING JAYA: The executor named in a disputed grant of probate issued for the estate of the late Kevin Morais, has defended his appointment, saying the application was made with the approval of the murdered deputy public prosecutor’s brothers.
In a joint defence statement filed in the Ipoh High Court on May 13, lawyer S Raam Kumar and law firm KB Tan, Kumar & Partners said they had Richard Morais’s “tacit, if not express consent” to propound a disputed copy of the deceased’s will dated May 21, 2005.
Raam Kumar and the law firm were responding to a suit brought by Richard last month, seeking to declare the impugned will and the grant of probate issued by the court on Dec 12, 2022 invalid.
Raam Kumar, the executor named in the grant, was named the first defendant in the suit. The law firm, in which Raam Kumar is a partner, was cited as the second defendant.
In the defence, Raam Kumar said he had a close, almost brotherly, relationship with Kevin.
He said he accompanied Richard to Kevin’s apartment in Kuala Lumpur on Sept 4, 2015, shortly after Kevin went missing.
“The first plaintiff (Richard) entered the deceased’s bedroom and on re-emerging therefrom, handed over to the first defendant (Raam Kumar) an envelope containing the impugned will,” the document read.
Raam Kumar said the will named Raymond Walker, who he came to know through Kevin, a beneficiary and a witness.
He said that in September 2015 he received an identical copy of the will via email from Gavin Walker, a nephew of Raymond, who had died a year earlier.
He also said Richard had legal representation when a consensus was reached among Kevin’s siblings – Richard, Charles and David – authorising him to probate a copy of the will.
“All reasonable efforts were made to secure the production of the original copy of the impugned will and it was only at the persistent urging of the plaintiff (Richard) coupled with the express consent of the plaintiff (Richard) and/or his solicitors and David that the first defendant (Raam Kumar) proceeded to probate the impugned will,” the defence read.
Raam Kumar claimed consensus was also reached for a redistribution of Raymond’s 70% share under the will equally among the three brothers.
He said Richard affirmed and filed his affidavit in the probate action only after it had been vetted and approved by Richard’s solicitors.
Richard’s police report dated Feb 21, 2024 was “an afterthought and actuated by bad faith”, Raam Kumar added.
In the defence, the law firm said it cannot be held vicariously liable to Richard “as at all material times, it acted for the first defendant (Raam Kumar) only”.
“The plaintiff (Richard) was never the second defendant’s (the law firm’s) client. As such the second defendant owes no duty of care to the plaintiff,” it said.
In any event, Raam Kumar denies misconducting himself or acting fraudulently or negligently in the course of probating the impugned will.
He also denies refusing to give an account of the monies due to Richard, saying instead that Richard’s portion of the estate, valued at RM224,552.01, was paid over to the director-general of insolvency as Richard was an undischarged bankrupt.
The defence statement was filed by solicitors Satish Alli & Associates.
Richard is represented by lawyers S Ravichandran & Anuar.
Prior to the filing of the suit, Richard had secured a citation from the High Court compelling Raam Kumar to surrender the grant of probate, which he has done.
Kevin, 55, went missing on Sept 4, 2015. His body was found in an oil drum filled with cement in Subang Jaya 12 days later.
Four years ago, the High Court convicted six men, including a former military doctor, of his murder.
The decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal on March 14 this year. - FMT

---