WA-29PB-302-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

WA-29PB-302-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application for extension of time is dismissed because the Notice of Appeal was filed 10 days late, the extension application was made approximately six months later, and the respondent failed to provide a satisfactory explanation or demonstrate extraneous circumstances; the respondent's participation in the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-29PB-302-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: Hong Leong Bank Bhd; First Respondent: Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi Malaysia; Second Respondent: Leong Seng Kin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 April 2023
Case Number
WA-29PB-302-04/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy (proceedings Under Bankruptcy Act 1967) / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal Against Registrar's Order; Preliminary Objection on Delay Considered by High Court
Outcome
Application for extension of time (Enclosure 30) dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal Deadlines, Discharge Prohibition Under Section 33 B(4), Registrar Decisions, Order 56 Rule 1(3) ROC
Bankruptcy Law Insolvency Civil Procedure Administrative Law Extension of Time Appeal Deadlines Discharge Prohibition Under Section 33 B(4) Registrar Decisions +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Hong Leong Bank Bhd

Applicant

Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi Malaysia

First Respondent

Leong Seng Kin

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy (proceedings Under Bankruptcy Act 1967) / Application for Extension of Time to File Appeal Against Registrar's Order; Preliminary Objection on Delay Considered by High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to extend time to file the Notice of Appeal
  2. 2 Whether the Notice of Appeal was filed within the time prescribed by Order 56 Rule 1(3) ROC
  3. 3 Whether the respondent provided a satisfactory explanation for delay and met the Bala Subramaniam test

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time is dismissed because the Notice of Appeal was filed 10 days late, the extension application was made approximately six months later, and the respondent failed to provide a satisfactory explanation or demonstrate extraneous circumstances; the respondent's participation in the proceedings and available opportunities to ascertain the decision showed the delay was inordinate and inexcusable.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time (Enclosure 30) dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed with no order as to costs.
  • The Senior Assistant Registrar's order dated 08.07.2022 prohibiting the DGI from issuing a certificate of discharge to the bankrupt for two years remains in effect.