PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN 1. ) Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang 2. ) KAMIL BIN JANTAN 3. ) NORLIAH BINTI SALLEH 4. ) ANTOI BIN MABOT 5. ) MOHD NOR KAMISAN BIN WAHAB 6. ) TAN BIN JANTAN 7. ) SOOI TEE TOOTOI 8. ) SABTU BIN BATIN SALLEH 9. ) ISMAIL BIN J
The bankruptcy notice dated 9.3.2022 was null and void ab initio because the 26 judgment creditors were not the persons entitled to enforce the Court of Appeal order (the RHB Trustee/Trust Fund held that right), the notice did not conform to the terms of the COA order, and the creditors failed to obtain mandatory leave required to issue bankruptcy proceedings against a partner not separately served; therefore the notice is set aside.
- Citation
- WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Judgment Creditors: Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang & 25 Others; Judgment Debtor: Dinesh Kanavaji a/l Kanawagi
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 10 August 2022
- Case Number
- WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Bankruptcy Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice / Summons in Chambers Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice Dated 9.3.2022
- Outcome
- Application allowed in part; bankruptcy notice dated 9.3.2022 set aside
- Legal Topics
- Bankruptcy Notice, Leave to Commence Bankruptcy Proceedings, Assignment of Debt, Enforcement of Judgment, Service of Process
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang & 25 Others
Judgment Creditors
Dinesh Kanavaji a/l Kanawagi
Judgment Debtor
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice / Summons in Chambers Application to Set Aside Bankruptcy Notice Dated 9.3.2022
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the 26 judgment creditors were entitled to apply for issuance of the bankruptcy notice
- 2 Whether leave of court was required before issuing a bankruptcy notice against a partner not separately served
Ratio Decidendi
The bankruptcy notice dated 9.3.2022 was null and void ab initio because the 26 judgment creditors were not the persons entitled to enforce the Court of Appeal order (the RHB Trustee/Trust Fund held that right), the notice did not conform to the terms of the COA order, and the creditors failed to obtain mandatory leave required to issue bankruptcy proceedings against a partner not separately served; therefore the notice is set aside.
Court Disposition
Application allowed in part; bankruptcy notice dated 9.3.2022 set aside
Orders
- Bankruptcy notice dated 9.3.2022 is set aside
- No order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment