Suresh s/o Purushothaman v Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan

[2024] SGHC 269 High Court (General Division) 24 October 2024 • HC/OA 201/2024 • 5 min read

Key facts

Court	High Court (General Division)
Decided	24 October 2024
Judge	Choo Han Teck
Charges / claim	Civil Procedure
Counsel	R. S. Solomon LLC, Darryl Ho Jun Han

Source: [2024] SGHC 269, High Court (General Division), decided 24 October 2024 — eLitigation. Updated 25 June 2026.

Catchwords

Civil Procedure - Originating processes

Practice Areas

Civil Procedure

Judges (1)

Choo Han Teck Delivered

Counsel (2)

R. S. Solomon LLC Firm Darryl Ho Jun Han Counsel Claimant

Parties (2)

Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan Defendant Suresh s/o Purushothaman Claimant

Case Significance

In Suresh s/o Purushothaman v Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan [2024] SGHC 269, the General Division of the High Court heard Originating Application No 201 of 2024, brought in the matter of section 18(2) of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act read with section 2 of the First Schedule of that Act. The claimant, Suresh s/o Purushothaman, aged 45, and the defendant, Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan, aged 59, had purchased a Housing Development Board ("HDB") flat as joint tenants on 27 May 2016, though they were not and are not married to each other. According to the judgment, the claimant had had no stable employment since the parties first met in 2013, while the defendant worked as an optical assistant in the United Kingdom, having left Singapore in early 2018. Choo Han Teck J reserved judgment after the hearing on 22 October 2024 and delivered it on 24 October 2024.

Summary

Suresh s/o Purushothaman, aged 45, and Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan, aged 59, who were not married, had purchased an HDB flat as joint tenants in 2016, and a dispute arose over ownership, a purported transfer of the defendant's share signed while she was an undischarged bankrupt, and competing factual allegations including coercion and physical abuse. The proceeding raised the question of how the contested factual issues over the flat and its ownership should be resolved. The court ordered, under O 15 r 7(6)(c) of the Rules of Court 2021, that the originating application be converted into an originating claim, with directions for the filing of a statement of claim and defence, and observed that the case was best suited to mediation.

What did the dispute in Suresh s/o Purushothaman v Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan [2024] SGHC 269 concern?

The case concerned an HDB flat that Suresh s/o Purushothaman, aged 45, and Kusula Kumari d/o A Kesavan, aged 59, had purchased as joint tenants on 27 May 2016 without being married, decided by Choo Han Teck J in the General Division of the High Court.