TAN CHEE LEONG 1. ) TAN CHOON BEE 2. ) LIM AH CHUAN 3. ) Tan Aik Huat 4. ) TAN YIEN CHING

TAN CHEE LEONG 1. ) TAN CHOON BEE 2. ) LIM AH CHUAN 3. ) Tan Aik Huat 4. ) TAN YIEN CHING

Substituted service was validly ordered and properly effected, the default judgments were therefore regularly obtained; the application was filed approximately nine months after the judgments without seeking extension or permission; defendants failed to disclose a prima facie meritorious defence and relied on bare denials or unparticularised assertions; accordingly the application to set aside is dismissed and the default judgments are upheld.

Citation
BD-B52NCC-18-08/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Plaintiff: Tan Chee Leong; Defendant: Tan Choon Bee; Defendant: Lim Ah Chuan; Defendant: Tan Aik Huat; Defendant: Tan Yien Ching
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 November 2025
Case Number
BD-B52NCC-18-08/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt (loan) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (order 13 R.8)
Outcome
Application dismissed; default judgments upheld; costs awarded to Plaintiff.
Legal Topics
Setting Aside Default Judgment, Service of Process, Substituted Service, Loan Agreement, Dishonoured Cheques
Source Language
Malay/English
Civil Procedure Contract Debt Recovery Evidence Setting Aside Default Judgment Service of Process Substituted Service Loan Agreement +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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Chee Leong

Plaintiff

Tan Choon Bee

Defendant

Lim Ah Chuan

Defendant

Tan Aik Huat

Defendant

Tan Yien Ching

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt (loan) / Application to Set Aside Default Judgment (order 13 R.8)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether default judgments were regularly obtained
  2. 2 Whether substituted service was properly effected
  3. 3 Whether defendants filed the application within time or sought extension

Ratio Decidendi

Substituted service was validly ordered and properly effected, the default judgments were therefore regularly obtained; the application was filed approximately nine months after the judgments without seeking extension or permission; defendants failed to disclose a prima facie meritorious defence and relied on bare denials or unparticularised assertions; accordingly the application to set aside is dismissed and the default judgments are upheld.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; default judgments upheld; costs awarded to Plaintiff.

Orders

  • Application Lamp. 23 dismissed
  • Default judgments dated 21/11/2024 and 13/12/2024 are upheld