PER: RAVICHANTHIRAN A/L GANESAN (NRIC No: 621221-05-5649) EX-PARTE: MAT SHAH BIN SAFUAN (NRIC No: 470406-10-5707)

PER: RAVICHANTHIRAN A/L GANESAN (NRIC No: 621221-05-5649) EX-PARTE: MAT SHAH BIN SAFUAN (NRIC No: 470406-10-5707)

The Senior Assistant Registrar did not err: the Consent Judgment remained final, unsuspended and enforceable; the Mode of Settlement Agreement reaffirmed rather than varied the Consent Judgment; res judicata did not bar a fresh bankruptcy notice where the earlier notice was set aside with liberty to file afresh; the purported security evidence was not admissible on appeal and, in any event, did not relieve the JD of personal liability under the Consent Judgment; consequently an act of bankruptcy was committed and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
JA-29NCC-2183-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Judgment Debtor: Ravichanthiran a/l Ganesan; Judgment Creditor: Mat Shah bin Safuan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
30 September 2019
Case Number
JA-29NCC-2183-12/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Decision of Senior Assistant Registrar
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Consent Orders, Bankruptcy Notice, Act of Bankruptcy, Guarantor, Fresh Evidence in Appeal, Service and Timelines for Affidavits, Securing/compounding Debt
Source Language
Malay/English
Insolvency/bankruptcy Civil Procedure Contract Enforcement of Judgment Res Judicata Consent Orders Bankruptcy Notice Act of Bankruptcy +4 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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ravichanthiran a/l Ganesan

Judgment Debtor

Mat Shah bin Safuan

Judgment Creditor

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy / Appeal to Judge in Chambers From Decision of Senior Assistant Registrar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether doctrine of res judicata estops filing of fresh bankruptcy notice
  2. 2 Whether the Consent Judgment remains valid and enforceable
  3. 3 Whether the Mode of Settlement Agreement varied or superseded the Consent Judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The Senior Assistant Registrar did not err: the Consent Judgment remained final, unsuspended and enforceable; the Mode of Settlement Agreement reaffirmed rather than varied the Consent Judgment; res judicata did not bar a fresh bankruptcy notice where the earlier notice was set aside with liberty to file afresh; the purported security evidence was not admissible on appeal and, in any event, did not relieve the JD of personal liability under the Consent Judgment; consequently an act of bankruptcy was committed and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs awarded to Judgment Creditor in the amount of MYR2,500 subject to allocatur fees