MUHAMMAD HANIF BIN ISMAIL AZHAR BIN MUSTAPHA

MUHAMMAD HANIF BIN ISMAIL AZHAR BIN MUSTAPHA

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: the sworn affidavit was properly admitted and not shown to be signed under duress; the defence lacked corroborative evidence; the evidence of SP2 though related was admissible and supportive; unpleaded third‑party facts could not be relied upon; the appellant's silence to the demand notice and the combined evidence (bank deposit into Khalifa Kota Travel account, partial repayments, affidavit) established the loan and outstanding balance; appeal dismissed with costs RM5,000 subject to taxation.

Citation
DA-12BNCvC-2-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Perayu/appellant/defendan: Muhammad Hanif bin Ismail; Responden/respondent/plaintif: Azhar bin Mustapha
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 April 2022
Case Number
DA-12BNCvC-2-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (from Sessions Court) / Appellate Decision at High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Loan Agreement, Sworn Affidavit (akuan Bersumpah), Duress, Pleading Requirements, Witness Credibility, Demand Notice and Admission, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Evidence Civil Procedure Loan Agreement Sworn Affidavit (akuan Bersumpah) Duress Pleading Requirements Witness Credibility +2 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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Muhammad Hanif bin Ismail

Perayu/appellant/defendan

Azhar bin Mustapha

Responden/respondent/plaintif

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (from Sessions Court) / Appellate Decision at High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court erred in admitting the sworn affidavit without calling the commissioner of oaths and whether the affidavit was made under duress
  2. 2 Whether the defence of duress was established
  3. 3 Whether the testimony of an interested witness (SP2) was admissible and credible

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court: the sworn affidavit was properly admitted and not shown to be signed under duress; the defence lacked corroborative evidence; the evidence of SP2 though related was admissible and supportive; unpleaded third‑party facts could not be relied upon; the appellant's silence to the demand notice and the combined evidence (bank deposit into Khalifa Kota Travel account, partial repayments, affidavit) established the loan and outstanding balance; appeal dismissed with costs RM5,000 subject to taxation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Sessions Court judgment upheld