1. ) 1. CHONG SING LENG [NRIC NO: 580305-08-5345] 2. ) 2. MUN CHOOI PENG (P) [NRIC NO: 621118-10-7578] 1. ) 1. LIQUIDATOR ON BEHALF OF JUTA VILA (M) SDN BHD [Company No. 229400-W (under winding up)] 2. ) 2. LEE WAN LUNG [NRIC NO: 730920-07-
Even if Public Bank held an equitable interest by assignment, that interest was in substance a security/mortgage which Public Bank failed to enforce within the statutory and equitable period; repeated notices of the plaintiffs' claim from 2003 and long failure to act (including failure to disclose or value security in insolvency proceedings and inaction for some 17 years) meant Public Bank's claim was barred by limitation, laches and acquiescence; the DGI's conduct waived any service irregularity and retrospective sanction was appropriate, so the application to set aside the 2016 Order was dismissed.
- Citation
- AA-24NCVC-131-03/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Chong Sing Leng; Plaintiff: Mun Chooi Peng; First Defendant (liquidator): Liquidator on behalf of Juta Vila (M) Sdn Bhd; Second Defendant (bankrupt): Lee Wan Lung; Third Defendant (applicant): Public Bank Berhad
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 26 July 2021
- Case Number
- AA-24NCVC-131-03/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Originating Summons / Judgment (high Court)
- Outcome
- Public Bank's application to set aside the Order dated 8.8.2016 (prayer iii) and its related directions (prayer iv) dismissed; Public Bank's earlier application to intervene had been allowed and it was added as Third Defendant.
- Legal Topics
- Assignment, Equitable Mortgage, Caveat, Laches, Acquiescence, Res Judicata, Functus Officio, Service of Process, Winding Up, Bankruptcy
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Chong Sing Leng
Plaintiff
Mun Chooi Peng
Plaintiff
Liquidator on behalf of Juta Vila (M) Sdn Bhd
First Defendant (liquidator)
Lee Wan Lung
Second Defendant (bankrupt)
Public Bank Berhad
Third Defendant (applicant)
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment (high Court)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Court was functus officio and lacked jurisdiction to hear the application to set aside the Order of 8.8.2016
- 2 Whether the Order of 8.8.2016 was irregular and should be set aside ex debito justitiae for lack of service on the DGI
- 3 Whether Unit No.19-4 Parkview Apartment and 4S Parkview Apartment are the same property and whether Public Bank's claim (via assignment) is defeated by limitation, laches and acquiescence
Ratio Decidendi
Even if Public Bank held an equitable interest by assignment, that interest was in substance a security/mortgage which Public Bank failed to enforce within the statutory and equitable period; repeated notices of the plaintiffs' claim from 2003 and long failure to act (including failure to disclose or value security in insolvency proceedings and inaction for some 17 years) meant Public Bank's claim was barred by limitation, laches and acquiescence; the DGI's conduct waived any service irregularity and retrospective sanction was appropriate, so the application to set aside the 2016 Order was dismissed.
Court Disposition
Public Bank's application to set aside the Order dated 8.8.2016 (prayer iii) and its related directions (prayer iv) dismissed; Public Bank's earlier application to intervene had been allowed and it was added as Third Defendant.
Orders
- Prayer (iii) and prayer (iv) of Enclosure 10 dismissed with costs
- Costs of RM10,000.00 awarded to the Plaintiffs (subject to allocatur) to be paid by the Third Defendant (Public Bank Berhad)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment