PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN INNOSEVEN SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Bin Abdullah

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN INNOSEVEN SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Bin Abdullah

The appeal is dismissed because the Rule 116 notice failed to specify the statements in the creditor's petition which the judgment debtor intended to deny or dispute, a fundamental requirement under Rule 116; additionally, there is no basis to treat the Rule 116 notice as a separate hearing distinct from the creditor's petition, so dismissal of the notice was correct.

Citation
WA-29NCC-569-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Muhammad Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah; Judgment Creditor: Innoseven Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 January 2026
Case Number
WA-29NCC-569-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy (commercial Division) / Appeal Against Registrar's Dismissal of Notice of Intention to Oppose Petition (rule 116/form 45)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Notice of Intention to Oppose Petition, Form 45, Rule 116, Hearing Procedure, Validity of Pleadings
Source Language
Malay/English
Insolvency Bankruptcy Civil Procedure Notice of Intention to Oppose Petition Form 45 Rule 116 Hearing Procedure Validity of Pleadings

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah

Judgment Debtor

Innoseven Sdn Bhd

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy (commercial Division) / Appeal Against Registrar's Dismissal of Notice of Intention to Oppose Petition (rule 116/form 45)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Notice of Intention to Oppose Petition under Rule 116 is valid where it does not specify the statements in the petition to be denied or disputed
  2. 2 Whether a Rule 116 notice may be heard separately from the hearing of the creditor's petition

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Rule 116 notice failed to specify the statements in the creditor's petition which the judgment debtor intended to deny or dispute, a fundamental requirement under Rule 116; additionally, there is no basis to treat the Rule 116 notice as a separate hearing distinct from the creditor's petition, so dismissal of the notice was correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Enclosure 182 struck out with no order as to costs