TECHWARE ENTERPRISE SDN BHD Ong Chee Seng (Sebagai Pentadbir Harta Pusaka Bagi Pihak Simati Bernama Teoh Ah Nya @ Teoh Seok Lang)

TECHWARE ENTERPRISE SDN BHD Ong Chee Seng (Sebagai Pentadbir Harta Pusaka Bagi Pihak Simati Bernama Teoh Ah Nya @ Teoh Seok Lang)

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: defendant failed to produce documentary exhibits to substantiate that third‑party delays caused the late delivery; LAD is properly calculated from the date of deposit/booking fee; there were no sufficient grounds to set aside the default judgment dated 5.12.2022;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
PA-12ANCvC-31-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: Techware Enterprise Sdn Bhd; Respondent/plaintiff: Ong Chee Seng (as administrator of the estate of Teoh Ah Nya @ Teoh Seok Lang)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 April 2024
Case Number
PA-12ANCvC-31-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court decision affirmed; default judgment maintained
Legal Topics
Late Delivery of Vacant Possession (lad), Default Judgment/set Aside, Calculation of LAD Start Date, Privity and Third‑party Delay, Evidentiary Requirement for Affidavits/exhibits
Contract Property Civil Procedure Late Delivery of Vacant Possession (lad) Default Judgment/set Aside Calculation of LAD Start Date Privity and Third‑party Delay Evidentiary Requirement for Affidavits/exhibits

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Techware Enterprise Sdn Bhd

Appellant/defendant

Ong Chee Seng (as administrator of the estate of Teoh Ah Nya @ Teoh Seok Lang)

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Sessions Court / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court should set aside the Sessions Court's refusal to vacate the default judgment
  2. 2 Whether the developer is liable for LAD for late delivery of vacant possession and the correct commencement date for LAD calculation
  3. 3 Whether delays attributable to third parties exempt the developer from liability

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court: defendant failed to produce documentary exhibits to substantiate that third‑party delays caused the late delivery; LAD is properly calculated from the date of deposit/booking fee; there were no sufficient grounds to set aside the default judgment dated 5.12.2022; accordingly the appeal is dismissed and the lower court's decision is maintained.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Sessions Court decision affirmed; default judgment maintained

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Sessions Court dated 23.6.2024 affirmed