PESTECH ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY CHINA CO., LTD PESTECH SDN BHD

PESTECH ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY CHINA CO., LTD PESTECH SDN BHD

The Writ and Statement of Claim were validly served and the JIDA was regularly obtained; the Defendant failed to enter appearance within the prescribed period, failed to explain the delay in applying to set aside, and did not disclose a bona fide prima facie defence (the Proposed Defence was a sham); therefore the application to set aside the JIDA was dismissed and costs awarded to the Plaintiff.

Citation
WA-22NCvC-530-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
PLAINTIFF: PESTECH ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY (CHINA) CO. LTD.; DEFENDANT: PESTECH SDN BHD
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 February 2026
Case Number
WA-22NCvC-530-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Suit / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Judgment in Default of Appearance (jida)
Outcome
Application to set aside the Judgment in Default of Appearance (Enclosure 7) dismissed.
Legal Topics
Judgment in Default of Appearance, Setting Aside Default Judgment, Service of Process, Prima Facie Defence Requirement, Sham Defence, Costs
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Debt Recovery Company Law Judgment in Default of Appearance Setting Aside Default Judgment Service of Process Prima Facie Defence Requirement +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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PESTECH ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY (CHINA) CO. LTD.

PLAINTIFF

PESTECH SDN BHD

DEFENDANT

Procedural Posture

Civil Suit / Judgment on Application to Set Aside Judgment in Default of Appearance (jida)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the JIDA was regularly obtained
  2. 2 Whether service of the Writ and Statement of Claim was valid
  3. 3 Whether the Defendant disclosed a prima facie meritorious defence to set aside a regularly obtained JID

Ratio Decidendi

The Writ and Statement of Claim were validly served and the JIDA was regularly obtained; the Defendant failed to enter appearance within the prescribed period, failed to explain the delay in applying to set aside, and did not disclose a bona fide prima facie defence (the Proposed Defence was a sham); therefore the application to set aside the JIDA was dismissed and costs awarded to the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Application to set aside the Judgment in Default of Appearance (Enclosure 7) dismissed.

Orders

  • Enclosure 7 dismissed.
  • Judgment in Default of Appearance dated 25.9.2025 is confirmed.