Rm30m Suit Filed Not To Sow Discord Between Vinod And Anwar Witness

---

 


A plaintiff in the suit against businessperson Vinod Sekhar for fraud, misrepresentation and breach of contract denied that he linked the defendant to Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to sow discord between them.
Graham David Bell, 66, did so when cross-examinined by Vinod’s lawyer Rajan Navaratnam at the Kuala Lumpur High Court today.
When questioned further, Bell agreed with Rajan’s suggestion that there is no evidence to prove Vinod used Anwar’s name to solicit any kind of investment or money from him or other 11 plaintiffs.
The plaintiff’s witness, however, disagreed with Rajan’s suggestion that the suit was filed in 2023 after Anwar became the prime minister and that the timing of the suit’s filing evinces an ulterior motive to link Anwar and Vinod.
Rajan’s contention referred to the portion of the plaintiffs’ statement of claim where they said Vinod had represented himself as being connected with influential people with a political background, including Anwar.
Bell further disagreed with the defence counsel’s contention that there was no evidence in court to back the plaintiffs’ claims on alleged representation. However, the witness admitted he could not show such evidence to back his disagreement.
He also told the court that neither he nor the other plaintiffs had filed any police report against Vinod, or his wife Winny Yeap Liew Heoh, who is the second defendant in the case, for the alleged fraud.
He disagreed, however, that their suit was based on “completely baseless and inaccurate” claims or that it was frivolous.
Proceedings ended with Rajan concluding his cross-examination, which stretched over three days beginning Oct 6, and involved over 500 questions examining Bell’s evidence and the plaintiffs’ statement of claim.
The trial before judge Adam @ Edward Abdullah will continue tomorrow with Bell being re-examined by his counsel, Colin Andrew Pereira.
Case background
Bell, who is the fourth plaintiff in the suit, has been testifying since Monday on behalf of all plaintiffs as ordered by the court.
Ten of the plaintiffs were investors with Vinod: Bell, Arthur J Mirante II, Ronald Barrie Clapham, Charles Robert Henry Stone, Paul Sallis Benney, Paul Nicholas Smith, Octavio Augusto Vallarino Arias, Simon Hafeitz Homsany, Talbortt Gerard Young and Uri Fruchtmann.
The remaining two plaintiffs, Andrew Murray-Watson and April Srivikorn, are Vinod’s former employees.
The plaintiffs filed the suit against the two defendants on May 31, 2023, seeking RM30 million in damages, including interest, for misrepresentation, fraud and breach of contract.
They claimed that Vinod had persuaded them to invest their money with him or with his various companies, without disclosing his purported bankruptcy at the material time.
In their statements of claim, the plaintiffs said that they queried Vinod on the bankruptcy matters via email on Sept 30, 2020. The latter “brushed it off” and appeared to suggest that one “Anwar” would attend to the matter and that he is aligned with Anwar.
The plaintiffs believe that “Anwar” refers to Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. They named Yeap as the second defendant in the case, alleging she had conspired with Vinod to perpetrate fraud, breach of contract and misrepresentation against them. - Mkini

---