MUHAMAD SAMSUL NIZAM BIN SOHHIMI NINJA LOGISTICS SDN. BHD.

MUHAMAD SAMSUL NIZAM BIN SOHHIMI NINJA LOGISTICS SDN. BHD.

The appeal is allowed because material disputes of fact—notably irreconcilable discrepancies in the quantum of debt and the absence of the Appellant's signature on the core contract—render the matter unsuitable for summary determination under Order 14A; the unstamped defect was subsequently cured by stamping but does not resolve the triable issue of consensus ad idem, therefore the summary judgment is set aside and the matter is remitted for full trial.

Citation
KA-12ANCvC-1-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / First Defendant: Muhamad Samsul Nizam bin Sohhimi; Respondent / Plaintiff: Ninja Logistics Sdn. Bhd.; Second Defendant: Muhammad Faiz bin Abdullah
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
31 July 2025
Case Number
KA-12ANCvC-1-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (order 14 a Application) / Judgment on Appeal Matter Remitted to Sessions Court for Full Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; summary judgment under Order 14A set aside; matter remitted to the Sessions Court for a full trial; costs awarded to the Appellant
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14 a ROC 2012), Quantum of Debt, Validity and Admissibility of Contract (signatures, Stamping), Judicial Admissions, Partnership Liability, Remittal for Full Trial
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Law Commercial Law Evidence Revenue/stamp Law Summary Judgment (order 14 a ROC 2012) Quantum of Debt Validity and Admissibility of Contract (signatures, Stamping) +3 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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhamad Samsul Nizam bin Sohhimi

Appellant / First Defendant

Ninja Logistics Sdn. Bhd.

Respondent / Plaintiff

Muhammad Faiz bin Abdullah

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (order 14 a Application) / Judgment on Appeal Matter Remitted to Sessions Court for Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an application under Order 14A ROC 2012 was appropriate where material facts (quantum of debt and execution of contract) were disputed
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant was personally liable for the debt as a sole proprietor and partner
  3. 3 Whether an unsigned and initially unstamped contract is admissible or otherwise fatal to summary determination

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed because material disputes of fact—notably irreconcilable discrepancies in the quantum of debt and the absence of the Appellant's signature on the core contract—render the matter unsuitable for summary determination under Order 14A; the unstamped defect was subsequently cured by stamping but does not resolve the triable issue of consensus ad idem, therefore the summary judgment is set aside and the matter is remitted for full trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; summary judgment under Order 14A set aside; matter remitted to the Sessions Court for a full trial; costs awarded to the Appellant

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Order 14A judgment set aside