1. ) Letchume A/p Subramaniam 2. ) LAI YI BAO PROMPT PAY SDN BHD

1. ) Letchume A/p Subramaniam 2. ) LAI YI BAO PROMPT PAY SDN BHD

The appellants' defences were limited to bare denials without cogent supporting evidence or forensic proof; documentary evidence (the signed loan agreement witnessed by counsel, the lawyer's affidavit, bank transaction slip, signed authorisation letter and registered caveat) established a prima facie case that the loan was executed and monies disbursed; appellants failed to meet the minimum evidential threshold to raise a triable issue under Order 14 KKM 2012; accordingly the Sessions Court's grant of summary judgment was proper and is affirmed.

Citation
JA-12ANCC-12-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant 1: Jeeva A/P Subramaniam; Appellant/defendant 2: Lai Yi Bao; Respondent/plaintiff: Prompt Pay Sdn Bhd
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 October 2023
Case Number
JA-12ANCC-12-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment Under Order 14 Kaedah Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 / Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment on an Order 14 Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Appeal dismissed and Sessions Court decision affirmed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment (order 14), Signature Authenticity and Forgery Allegations, Registration of Caveat/lien, Validity and Enforceability of Loan Agreements, Deposit of Title Deeds, Onus and Threshold of Evidence for Leave to Defend
Source Language
Malay/English
Contract Law Civil Procedure Evidence Law Property Law Banking and Finance Summary Judgment (order 14) Signature Authenticity and Forgery Allegations Registration of Caveat/lien +3 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 7 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jeeva A/P Subramaniam

Appellant/defendant 1

Lai Yi Bao

Appellant/defendant 2

Prompt Pay Sdn Bhd

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against Summary Judgment Under Order 14 Kaedah Kaedah Mahkamah 2012 / Appeal From Sessions Court Judgment on an Order 14 Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants signed the loan agreement or raised a triable issue as to signature authenticity
  2. 2 Whether the loan monies were in fact disbursed to the appellants
  3. 3 Whether the appellants deposited the title deed and authorised registration of a caveat/lien

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants' defences were limited to bare denials without cogent supporting evidence or forensic proof; documentary evidence (the signed loan agreement witnessed by counsel, the lawyer's affidavit, bank transaction slip, signed authorisation letter and registered caveat) established a prima facie case that the loan was executed and monies disbursed; appellants failed to meet the minimum evidential threshold to raise a triable issue under Order 14 KKM 2012; accordingly the Sessions Court's grant of summary judgment was proper and is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed and Sessions Court decision affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Costs to respondent in the sum of RM2,000.00 subject to taxed allocatur