MADAH PERMATA SDN. BHD ABDUL RAZAK BIN A.S DAWOOD

MADAH PERMATA SDN. BHD ABDUL RAZAK BIN A.S DAWOOD

The High Court upheld the Sessions Judge: the plaintiff failed to plead a reasonable cause of action supported by contemporaneous documents; the alleged friendly loan had no fixed repayment term so limitation ran from disbursement on 26 May 2014; the six‑year limitation expired 25 May 2020 and the claim filed 19 January 2021 was time‑barred; consequently the claim was unsustainable and rightly struck out.

Citation
BA-12A-60-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Madah Permata Sdn. Bhd.; Respondent/defendant: Abdul Razak bin A. S. Dawood
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 February 2022
Case Number
BA-12A-60-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appellate Judgment (final)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Limitation Period, Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19(1), Friendly Loan/loan Repayable on Demand, Cause of Action, Abuse of Process, Pleading Consistency
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Limitation Law Limitation Period Strike Out Under Order 18 Rule 19(1) Friendly Loan/loan Repayable on Demand Cause of Action Abuse of Process +1 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 3 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madah Permata Sdn. Bhd.

Appellant/plaintiff

Abdul Razak bin A. S. Dawood

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appellate Judgment (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statement of claim discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the claim is time‑barred under the Limitation Act 1953
  3. 3 Whether pleadings are inconsistent or unsupported by contemporaneous documents

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the Sessions Judge: the plaintiff failed to plead a reasonable cause of action supported by contemporaneous documents; the alleged friendly loan had no fixed repayment term so limitation ran from disbursement on 26 May 2014; the six‑year limitation expired 25 May 2020 and the claim filed 19 January 2021 was time‑barred; consequently the claim was unsustainable and rightly struck out.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • High Court upholds Sessions Court decision to strike out the writ and statement of claim dated 19 January 2021
  • Claim dismissed as disclosing no reasonable cause of action and being statute‑barred under the Limitation Act 1953