TARUN HOTCHAND CHAINANI v AVINDERPAL SINGH S/O RANJIT SINGH & 2 Ors
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Kristy Tan |
| Charges / claim | Companies |
| Counsel | Gabriel Law Corporation, Legis Point LLC, Oon & Bazul LLP, Bernard Ee, Joel Quah, Keith Han Guangyuan, Lim Shack Keong, Lye Yu Min, Manoj Prakash Nandwani, Nur Iman Beck, Samuel Chacko |
Source: [2025] SGHC 110, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (11)
Case Significance
[2025] SGHC 110 is a High Court (General Division) decision dated 12 June 2025 concerning Companies, specifically addressing account. The judgment was delivered by Kristy Tan. The case was brought by Tarun Hotchand Chainani (plaintiff) against Avitar Enterprises Pte Ltd and others (defendant). Legal representation was provided by Legis Point LLC and Gabriel Law Corporation. The judgment cites 8 cases and references 1 statutory provision, namely the Evidence Act. This decision has been cited by 1 subsequent judgment in the dataset.
[2025] SGHC 110 explained
TARUN HOTCHAND CHAINANI v AVINDERPAL SINGH S/O RANJIT SINGH & 2 Ors ([2025] SGHC 110) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 12 June 2025. It is categorised under Companies. Within this corpus it has since been cited by 1 other reported Singapore judgment, a measure of how often later decisions have referred to it. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2025] SGHC 110 about?
TARUN HOTCHAND CHAINANI v AVINDERPAL SINGH S/O RANJIT SINGH & 2 Ors ([2025] SGHC 110) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2025. Its published catchwords are “Companies — Account”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2025] SGHC 110 consider?
The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2025] SGHC 110 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2024] SGHC 117 and [2024] SGHC 53. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
How influential is [2025] SGHC 110?
Within this corpus, [2025] SGHC 110 has been cited by 1 later reported Singapore judgment. That count reflects references from other decisions held in this corpus only and is a conservative lower bound on how often the case has actually been cited.
Summary
Following a liability judgment ordering the winding up of two companies and an accounting of profits on a wilful default basis by a director who had invested company funds in 20 properties and shares, the court conducted the taking of accounts. The court determined the principal sums and profits due from the director to the company for each property, finding the director failed to prove he had returned any amounts to the company, and ordered returns calculated using 1-year T-Bill rates.
What was decided in [2025] SGHC 110?
[2025] SGHC 110 (TARUN HOTCHAND CHAINANI v AVINDERPAL SINGH S/O RANJIT SINGH & 2 Ors) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 12 June 2025 addressing Companies, specifically account. The judgment was delivered by Kristy Tan.
Who were the parties in TARUN HOTCHAND CHAINANI v AVINDERPAL SINGH S/O RANJIT SINGH & 2 Ors ([2025] SGHC 110)?
The plaintiff in [2025] SGHC 110 was Tarun Hotchand Chainani, and the defendant was Avitar Enterprises Pte Ltd, Avitar Holdings Pte Ltd. Legal representation included Gabriel Law Corporation and Legis Point LLC. The case was decided on 12 June 2025 in the High Court (General Division).
Which judge decided [2025] SGHC 110?
[2025] SGHC 110 was delivered by Kristy Tan in the High Court (General Division) on 12 June 2025. The case concerned Companies.
What cases and statutes does [2025] SGHC 110 cite?
[2025] SGHC 110 cites 8 prior decisions. It references Evidence Act. The decision has itself been cited by 1 subsequent judgment.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (8)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2025] SGHC 110)