PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Mentari Dhuha Sdn Bhd PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Bin Abdullah

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Mentari Dhuha Sdn Bhd PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Bin Abdullah

The SAR and the Judge in Chambers correctly dismissed the appeal: the objections to the validity of the Request, Creditor's Petition and verifying affidavits lacked merit because the company's sole director had authority to execute the documents (and they were witnessed as required by s66 CA 2016), solicitors were properly authorised to request a bankruptcy notice, and established case law supports treating director-signed petitions as company-presented, so the documents were valid and the appeal fails.

Citation
WA-29NCC-2160-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Muhammad Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah; Judgment Creditor: Mentari Dhuha Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 June 2025
Case Number
WA-29NCC-2160-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Petition/insolvency Proceedings / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Senior Assistant Registrar's Dismissal of Notice of Intention to Oppose Creditor's Petition
Outcome
Notice of Appeal (Encl. 188) dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Authority to Execute Corporate Documents, Validity of Creditor's Petition, Affidavit Verification, Corporate Execution Under Companies Act 2016 S66, Insolvency Rules R215/bankruptcy Procedure
Source Language
Malay/English
Bankruptcy/insolvency Company Law Civil Procedure Authority to Execute Corporate Documents Validity of Creditor's Petition Affidavit Verification Corporate Execution Under Companies Act 2016 S66 Insolvency Rules R215/bankruptcy Procedure

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Zahir Sanjay bin Abdullah

Judgment Debtor

Mentari Dhuha Sdn Bhd

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Petition/insolvency Proceedings / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Senior Assistant Registrar's Dismissal of Notice of Intention to Oppose Creditor's Petition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Request to Issue Bankruptcy Notice was validly executed and authorised (solicitors v company officers)
  2. 2 Whether the Request and Creditor's Petition required execution by two authorised officers under Companies Act 2016 s66
  3. 3 Whether the Affidavit Verifying the Creditor's Petition was validly executed and authorised

Ratio Decidendi

The SAR and the Judge in Chambers correctly dismissed the appeal: the objections to the validity of the Request, Creditor's Petition and verifying affidavits lacked merit because the company's sole director had authority to execute the documents (and they were witnessed as required by s66 CA 2016), solicitors were properly authorised to request a bankruptcy notice, and established case law supports treating director-signed petitions as company-presented, so the documents were valid and the appeal fails.

Court Disposition

Notice of Appeal (Encl. 188) dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Encl 188 dismissed with costs