Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Creditor's petition

Legal area

Court

5 Mar 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN PAN MALAYSIAN ENTERPRISES SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ONG KEH KEONG

Citation

WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Both interlocutory appeals were dismissed because the matters and evidence relied upon could be properly raised and determined at the hearing of the Creditor's Petition, the Judgment Debtor would not be prejudiced by that course, and permitting separate interlocutory challenges in the absence of special circumstances wastes judicial resources.
5 Mar 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN PAN MALAYSIAN ENTERPRISES SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ONG KEH KEONG

Citation

WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-2004-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Both interlocutory appeals were dismissed because the evidence and objections sought could be raised and the affidavits filed to be read at the hearing of the creditor's petition, and permitting separate interlocutory hearings would duplicate submissions and waste judicial resources; therefore no extension or separate striking-out hearing was warranted and costs were awarded to the creditor.
5 Mar 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN 1. ) Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang 2. ) KAMIL BIN JANTAN 3. ) NORLIAH BINTI SALLEH 4. ) ANTOI BIN MABOT 5. ) MOHD NOR KAMISAN BIN WAHAB 6. ) TAN BIN JANTAN 7. ) SOOI TEE TOOTOI 8. ) SABTU BIN BATIN SALLEH 9. ) ISMAIL BIN J

Citation

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Deleting three named petitioning creditors from a multi-creditor Bankruptcy Notice and Creditor's Petition without application or court order changed the character of the petition and recharacterised the act of bankruptcy, thereby invalidating the Creditor's Petition and any Bankruptcy Order made pursuant thereto; appeals allowed and costs awarded.
5 Mar 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN 1. ) Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang 2. ) KAMIL BIN JANTAN 3. ) NORLIAH BINTI SALLEH 4. ) ANTOI BIN MABOT 5. ) MOHD NOR KAMISAN BIN WAHAB 6. ) TAN BIN JANTAN 7. ) SOOI TEE TOOTOI 8. ) SABTU BIN BATIN SALLEH 9. ) ISMAIL BIN J

Citation

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The deletion of three named petitioning creditors from a multi-creditor creditor's petition, without application to amend or court order, substantively changed the character of the creditor's petition as originally founded on a collective act of bankruptcy by 26 creditors; per Ambank v Lim Sue Beng this is fatal to the petition and renders the resultant Bankruptcy Order invalid, therefore the appeal setting aside the CP must be allowed and the BO set aside.
5 Mar 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN 1. ) Saling Bin Lau Bee Chiang 2. ) KAMIL BIN JANTAN 3. ) NORLIAH BINTI SALLEH 4. ) ANTOI BIN MABOT 5. ) MOHD NOR KAMISAN BIN WAHAB 6. ) TAN BIN JANTAN 7. ) SOOI TEE TOOTOI 8. ) SABTU BIN BATIN SALLEH 9. ) ISMAIL BIN J

Citation

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-306-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The deletion of three named petitioning creditors from a creditor's petition that was originally grounded on a collective act of bankruptcy by 26 creditors materially changed the character of the petition; following the Federal Court in Ambank v Lim Sue Beng this recharacterisation is fatal and invalidates the creditor's petition and any Bankruptcy Order made pursuant to it. Accordingly the appeal to set aside the petition succeeds and the consequent appeals setting aside the Bankruptcy Order are allowed.
21 Jan 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN AMBANK (M) BERHAD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN FOK WAI MUN

Citation

WA-29NCC-1462-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1462-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was allowed because the creditor was not legally obliged to attend the creditors' meetings and its failure to attend was not unreasonable; the debtor's Rule 11 proposal was commercially unviable and unsupported by assets or proof of ability to make the proposed payments, and therefore the creditor's non-attendance did not constitute "sufficient cause" under s.6(3) IA to dismiss the creditor's petition.
12 Nov 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN 1. ) Menara Jutamas Sdn Bhd 2. ) Amcorp Global Limited (dahulu dikenali sebagai Tee Land Limited) PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Abdul Kadir Bin Haji Sheikh Fadzir

Citation

WA-29NCC-928-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-928-07/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Bankruptcy Order valid and dismissed the debtor's challenge: a change of company name did not require leave under O.46 r.2(1)(b); the Interim Order expired on 7.1.2025 and the creditors' meeting on 4.2.2025 was invalid so no VA operated to prevent bankruptcy; the debtor failed to establish ability to pay; and the creditors had exhausted available enforcement against the wound‑up principal by filing a proof of debt, entitling them to proceed against the guarantor.
17 Sept 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN SOO CHOON LAI

Citation

WA-29NCC-911-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-911-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeals fail because the applications to set aside the Judgment‑in‑Default and the subsequent appeal were dismissed (no stay of execution), and the Bankruptcy Notice and Creditor's Petition correctly claimed compound interest consistent with the Judgment‑in‑Default; therefore the debtor's simple interest calculation was misconceived and did not render the BN/CP irregular.
17 Sept 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN MALAYAN BANKING BERHAD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN SOO CHOON LAI

Citation

WA-29NCC-911-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-911-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeals were dismissed because there was no stay of the judgment-in-default and the bankruptcy notice and creditor's petition properly reflected compound interest as provided by the judgment-in-default; the debtor's simple-interest calculation was therefore legally incorrect.
10 Sept 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Christopher Martin Boyd PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Deb Brata Das Gupta

Citation

WA-29NCC-1076-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1076-06/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the settlement did not extinguish the judgment because clause 5 expressly revived the judgment on default; accordingly the bankruptcy notice and creditor's petition based on the judgment were valid, and the affidavit sworn a day before filing did not invalidate the petition and is cured by s.131 IA absent evidence of prejudice.