SUNNY JUNCTION SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 657869-W) JITTRA SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 1016044-A)

SUNNY JUNCTION SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 657869-W) JITTRA SDN BHD (NO. SYARIKAT : 1016044-A)

Court of Appeal held appellant was not a "Purchaser" under the Scheme of Arrangement and held an indefeasible registered title; the SPA executed by ICEM pursuant to a Scheme‑derived Power of Attorney was invalid for non‑compliance with ss.3‑4 of the Power of Attorney Act 1949; High Court erred in treating appellant as Non‑Participating Purchaser and in entertaining unpleaded issues (illegal money‑lending); appeal allowed and respondent's claim against appellant dismissed.

Citation
W-02(NCC)(W)-1943-10/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / 1st Defendant / Registered Proprietor: Sunny Junction Sdn Bhd; Respondent / Plaintiff: Jittra Sdn Bhd; Developer / 2nd Defendant / Liquidator Represented Entity: Kumpulan Bumiklas Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation); White Knight / 3rd Defendant / Contractor: International Construction & Civil Engineering Sdn Bhd (ICEM); Funder / 4th Defendant: Uni Construction & Realty Sdn Bhd (UCR); Liquidators of Kumpulan Bumiklas: Dato' Heng Ji Keng & Michael Joseph Monteiro
Court
NCC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 May 2021
Case Number
W-02(NCC)(W)-1943-10/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Judgment on Appeal (final)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; High Court order dated 30 September 2019 as to appellant set aside; respondent's claim dismissed as against appellant
Legal Topics
Scheme of Arrangement, Specific Performance, Indefeasibility of Title, Power of Attorney Authentication, Winding Up, Disputed Unit Classification, Sale and Purchase Agreement Enforcement
Source Language
Malay/English
Companies Law Land Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Property Law Scheme of Arrangement Specific Performance Indefeasibility of Title +4 more

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sunny Junction Sdn Bhd

Appellant / 1st Defendant / Registered Proprietor

Jittra Sdn Bhd

Respondent / Plaintiff

Kumpulan Bumiklas Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation)

Developer / 2nd Defendant / Liquidator Represented Entity

International Construction & Civil Engineering Sdn Bhd (ICEM)

White Knight / 3rd Defendant / Contractor

Uni Construction & Realty Sdn Bhd (UCR)

Funder / 4th Defendant

Dato' Heng Ji Keng & Michael Joseph Monteiro

Liquidators of Kumpulan Bumiklas

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (court of Appeal) / Judgment on Appeal (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellant was a "Purchaser" bound by the Scheme of Arrangement
  2. 2 Whether the property was a disputed unit requiring a court order to prove ownership
  3. 3 Whether SPA executed by ICEM under a Power of Attorney was valid

Ratio Decidendi

Court of Appeal held appellant was not a "Purchaser" under the Scheme of Arrangement and held an indefeasible registered title; the SPA executed by ICEM pursuant to a Scheme‑derived Power of Attorney was invalid for non‑compliance with ss.3‑4 of the Power of Attorney Act 1949; High Court erred in treating appellant as Non‑Participating Purchaser and in entertaining unpleaded issues (illegal money‑lending); appeal allowed and respondent's claim against appellant dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; High Court order dated 30 September 2019 as to appellant set aside; respondent's claim dismissed as against appellant

Orders

  • High Court order dated 30 September 2019 vis-à-vis Sunny Junction set aside
  • Respondent's claim against Sunny Junction dismissed