Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Deposit recovery

Legal area

Court

6 Feb 2025

SCENIC FAREAST SDN BHD BIFORST LOGISTICS SDN BHD

Citation

BA-12BNCvC-41-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BNCvC-41-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

There was no factual basis for estoppel by conduct; on the balance of probabilities the reinstatement costs were more reasonably assessed at RM515,212.00 based on the defendant's invoices and the quantity surveyor's professional estimate; the Sessions Court judgment was therefore set aside and the defendant's appeal allowed.
27 May 2024

Impress Eight (M) Sdn Bhd Ultrabliss Sdn Bhd

Citation

BA-24NCC-97-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCC-97-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the Sale and Purchase Agreement became void when the State Authority consent was not obtained within the contractual periods and the plaintiff validly terminated the contract; there was no substantial dispute of fact so originating summons was the correct mode; the contractual 8% p.a. interest is a stipulated sum and not an excessive penalty under the law as clarified by the Federal Court in Cubic Electronics; the defendant's strike-out application failed and plaintiff's claim for refund of deposit with interest succeeds.
2 Feb 2023

TANAH SURIAMAS SDN BHD CHONG SUN NEE

Citation

AA-B52NCvC-37-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

AA-B52NCvC-37-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Defendant failed to discharge the onus to show transfer was appropriate; the closest nexus to the dispute is Ipoh because the subject land, the alleged breach, required dealings with local authorities and inspections are connected to Ipoh; signing of agreement or plaintiff's KL address alone do not warrant transfer; therefore the transfer application is dismissed.
1 Jun 2022

1. ) TAN CHOON SOON 2. ) TAN CHOON HOCK 1. ) MOHD AZHAR BIN MUSA 2. ) TEO WOON NE (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 3. ) WONG KIAN CHUNG (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 4.

Citation

CB-22NCvC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-22NCvC-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court held it had jurisdiction to hear the application under Order 14 despite remedies overlapping with Order 81 by applying Order 1A (interest of justice); on the affidavits the deposit payment of RM4.4 million was undisputed and defendants had not satisfied the condition precedent nor obtained requisite approvals before plaintiffs terminated; defendants' asserted COVID-19 delays and steps taken did not create triable issues sufficient to defeat summary judgment; accordingly permission was granted for plaintiffs to enter final judgment against the defendants to recover the deposit and relate…
30 Jul 2021

HERITAGE LOGISTICS SDN BHD WANAZALY BIN ANSANY

Citation

BL-12ANCVC-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-12ANCVC-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because the Sessions Court correctly found, on the affidavit evidence, that respondents had raised bona fide triable issues — including documented steps taken to satisfy the conditions precedent and delays attributable to COVID-19 and to the plaintiff's failure to provide mandatory documents — such that summary judgment under Aturan 14 was inappropriate; matter remitted for full trial and costs awarded to respondents.
10 May 2021

SIVARAM A/L SADASIVAN 1. ) VELOO A/L GANAPATHY 2. ) SANTHA KUMARI A/P N KUMARAVELOO

Citation

B52NCVC-458-12-2016 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

B52NCVC-458-12-2016 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The written sale and purchase agreement bearing the defendants' signatures and supporting documentary evidence established a binding contract; defendants failed to discharge the burden to prove the alleged collateral loan arrangement or instructions to transfer funds to MJ Equity/Jones Jamesraj; dishonoured cheques and payment records established defendants received plaintiff's money and confirmed liability; adverse inference under S114(g) Evidence Act was warranted for defendants' failure to call the material witness Jones Jamesraj; accordingly plaintiff entitled to repayment of RM790,000 an…

Malaysia Case Law

SCENIC FAREAST SDN BHD BIFORST LOGISTICS SDN BHD

Impress Eight (M) Sdn Bhd Ultrabliss Sdn Bhd

TANAH SURIAMAS SDN BHD CHONG SUN NEE

1. ) TAN CHOON SOON 2. ) TAN CHOON HOCK 1. ) MOHD AZHAR BIN MUSA 2. ) TEO WOON NE (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 3. ) WONG KIAN CHUNG (Beramal dibawah nama dan bentuk Tetuan Kartini & Wong Kian Chung) 4.

HERITAGE LOGISTICS SDN BHD WANAZALY BIN ANSANY

SIVARAM A/L SADASIVAN 1. ) VELOO A/L GANAPATHY 2. ) SANTHA KUMARI A/P N KUMARAVELOO