Ling Sie Kiiong Naushad Bin Abdul Rahiman PIHAK KETIGA 1. ) Sujad Sha Bin Abdul Rahman 2. ) Arashad Bin Abdul Rahman PIHAK TERKILAN SALIHIN

Ling Sie Kiiong Naushad Bin Abdul Rahiman PIHAK KETIGA 1. ) Sujad Sha Bin Abdul Rahman 2. ) Arashad Bin Abdul Rahman PIHAK TERKILAN SALIHIN

The court found all three directors in contempt: Arashad and Sujad for deliberate non-attendance in breach of the production/attendance orders, and Naushad for attending but failing to produce substantive documentary proof as required by the orders; accordingly the court imposed substantial fines with short default imprisonments and costs to vindicate the rule of law and to address prejudice to the liquidation process.

Citation
WA-28PW-268-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Petitioner: Maraya Sdn Bhd; Respondent (company): Tawakal Resources Sdn. Bhd.; Applicant (liquidator): Ling Sie Kiong
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 January 2026
Case Number
WA-28PW-268-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Companies (winding Up Petition); Committal for Contempt / Post Judgment: Notices of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal (against Committal Findings and Sentences)
Outcome
Directors Naushad, Arashad and Sujad held in contempt of court; fines and costs imposed; Notices of Appeal filed to Court of Appeal against the findings and sentences.
Legal Topics
Directors' Duties, Committal for Contempt, Production of Documents, Winding Up Proceedings
Source Language
Malay/English
Company Law Insolvency Law Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Directors' Duties Committal for Contempt Production of Documents Winding Up Proceedings

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maraya Sdn Bhd

Petitioner

Tawakal Resources Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent (company)

Ling Sie Kiong

Applicant (liquidator)

Procedural Posture

Companies (winding Up Petition); Committal for Contempt / Post Judgment: Notices of Appeal Filed to Court of Appeal (against Committal Findings and Sentences)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the three directors were in contempt of court for failing to comply with orders to produce company documents and to attend examination pursuant to s.502(3) CA 2016
  2. 2 Whether the explanations and documents produced by one director (Naushad) were sufficient to discharge the obligation under the Court Orders
  3. 3 Appropriate sentence (fine, costs, default imprisonment) for contempt in the circumstances and impact on liquidation recoveries

Ratio Decidendi

The court found all three directors in contempt: Arashad and Sujad for deliberate non-attendance in breach of the production/attendance orders, and Naushad for attending but failing to produce substantive documentary proof as required by the orders; accordingly the court imposed substantial fines with short default imprisonments and costs to vindicate the rule of law and to address prejudice to the liquidation process.

Court Disposition

Directors Naushad, Arashad and Sujad held in contempt of court; fines and costs imposed; Notices of Appeal filed to Court of Appeal against the findings and sentences.

Orders

  • Naushad bin Abdul Rahiman fined RM100,000.00 to be paid within 30 days (on or before 3:30pm on 2 March 2026) and in default committed to prison for 7 days; costs of RM10,000.00 awarded against him subject to allocatur.
  • Arashad bin Abdul Rahiman fined RM200,000.00 to be paid within 30 days (on or before 3:30pm on 2 March 2026) and in default committed to prison for 7 days; costs of RM10,000.00 awarded against him subject to allocatur.