PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN PAN MALAYSIAN ENTERPRISES SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ONG KEH KEONG

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN PAN MALAYSIAN ENTERPRISES SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ONG KEH KEONG

Both interlocutory appeals were dismissed because the evidence and objections sought could be raised and the affidavits filed to be read at the hearing of the creditor's petition, and permitting separate interlocutory hearings would duplicate submissions and waste judicial resources; therefore no extension or separate striking-out hearing was warranted and costs were awarded to the creditor.

Citation
WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Ong Keh Keong (Sole Proprietor of Ong Partnership); Judgment Creditor: Pan Malaysian Enterprises Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 March 2026
Case Number
WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Interlocutory Appeals From Judge in Chambers Concerning Applications Prior to Creditor's Petition; Notices of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Both Encl 43 and Encl 44 dismissed
Legal Topics
Creditor's Petition, Interlocutory Applications, Res Judicata, Striking Out, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Insolvency Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Creditor's Petition Interlocutory Applications Res Judicata Striking Out Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ong Keh Keong (Sole Proprietor of Ong Partnership)

Judgment Debtor

Pan Malaysian Enterprises Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation)

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Interlocutory Appeals From Judge in Chambers Concerning Applications Prior to Creditor's Petition; Notices of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether supplementary affidavits on res judicata should be allowed
  2. 2 Whether the application to strike out the Bankruptcy Notice should be heard separately or at the creditor's petition hearing
  3. 3 Whether extension of time to file affidavits should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

Both interlocutory appeals were dismissed because the evidence and objections sought could be raised and the affidavits filed to be read at the hearing of the creditor's petition, and permitting separate interlocutory hearings would duplicate submissions and waste judicial resources; therefore no extension or separate striking-out hearing was warranted and costs were awarded to the creditor.

Court Disposition

Both Encl 43 and Encl 44 dismissed

Orders

  • Encl 43 dismissed with costs of RM7,500.00 to the Judgment Creditor subject to allocatur
  • Encl 44 dismissed with costs of RM7,500.00 to the Judgment Creditor subject to allocatur