PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Wan Nazma Asyikin binti Wan Yusof for the Respondent/Judgment Creditor [Messrs Anad & Noraini] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Mugunthan Vadiveloo for the Appellant/Judgment Debtor [Messrs Mugu & Sufyan]

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Wan Nazma Asyikin binti Wan Yusof for the Respondent/Judgment Creditor [Messrs Anad & Noraini] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Mugunthan Vadiveloo for the Appellant/Judgment Debtor [Messrs Mugu & Sufyan]

The appeal was dismissed because the issues in the new summons were substantially the same as those already adjudicated and dismissed in Enclosure 19, therefore barred by res judicata; additionally the court was satisfied that leave had been properly granted and there was no special circumstance to revisit compliance with the insolvency provisions.

Citation
DALAM PERKARA KEBANKRAPAN NO. WA-29NCC-3807-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Jayakumar A/L A Kumarappan; Judgment Creditor: RHB Bank Berhad
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 November 2021
Case Number
DALAM PERKARA KEBANKRAPAN NO. WA-29NCC-3807-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Appeal to Judge in Chambers Against Dismissal of Summons to Strike Out BN and CP
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Insolvency Act Compliance, Bankruptcy Notice, Leave to Commence Bankruptcy Proceedings
Source Language
Malay/English
Bankruptcy Law Insolvency Law Civil Procedure Res Judicata Insolvency Act Compliance Bankruptcy Notice Leave to Commence Bankruptcy 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jayakumar A/L A Kumarappan

Judgment Debtor

RHB Bank Berhad

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Appeal to Judge in Chambers Against Dismissal of Summons to Strike Out BN and CP

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the summons to strike out the Bankruptcy Notice and Creditor's Petition was barred by res judicata
  2. 2 Whether the Judgment Creditor failed to comply with Sections 5(4) and 5(6) of the Insolvency Act 1967
  3. 3 Whether Rules 97 and 282 of the Insolvency Rules 2017 were complied with

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the issues in the new summons were substantially the same as those already adjudicated and dismissed in Enclosure 19, therefore barred by res judicata; additionally the court was satisfied that leave had been properly granted and there was no special circumstance to revisit compliance with the insolvency provisions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs of RM1,500 payable by the Appellant