Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Enforcement of judgments

Legal area

Court

23 Nov 2023

ASIAN KITCHEN (M) SDN BHD 1. ) MENARA KUALA LUMPUR SDN BHD 2. ) HYDROSHOPPE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-22NCC-399-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-399-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court granted leave to issue a Writ of Possession because the 1st Defendant satisfied the requirements of Order 45 r.3 and Order 46 r.3: the Plaintiff had sufficient notice (including service on solicitors and active participation), the summary judgment conclusively found the tenancy expired and occupation unlawful, and the pending appeal/stay did not constitute special circumstances to deny enforcement; accordingly enforcement of the summary judgment via writ was lawful and appropriate.
20 Aug 2021

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN James Culaz for the Respondent/Judgment Creditors [Messrs Culaz & Associates] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Dato Harpal Singh Grewal and Harchanan Nair for the Appellant/ Judgment Debtor [Messrs Rabinder Budiman & Associates]

Citation

BANKRUPTCY NO. WA-29NCC-1005-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BANKRUPTCY NO. WA-29NCC-1005-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal was dismissed because the alleged cross claims/counterclaims/set offs relied on by the debtor had been tried and decided against him by prior High Court and Federal Court orders, there was no stay of those orders, and therefore the debtor did not meet the requirement under s3(1)(i) Insolvency Act 1967 to set aside the Bankruptcy Notice.
3 Oct 2019

DHARSHINI A/P GANESON (NO KP:580915-04-5068) DORAISINGAM A/L THAMBYRAJAH (NO KP:560523-08-5863)

Citation

468-03/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

468-03/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Variation Order dated 6.4.2015 was a valid exercise of judicial discretion under the LRA and, as the sealed and pronounced order, it is the operative instrument; parts of the written grounds that contradict or purport to create additional orders (paragraphs 4 and 5) are not enforceable because grounds of judgment are reasons and not substitute for a formally pronounced and sealed order; therefore the appellant’s application to enforce those paragraphs was misconceived and the appeal is dismissed.

Malaysia Case Law

ASIAN KITCHEN (M) SDN BHD 1. ) MENARA KUALA LUMPUR SDN BHD 2. ) HYDROSHOPPE SDN BHD

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN James Culaz for the Respondent/Judgment Creditors [Messrs Culaz & Associates] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Dato Harpal Singh Grewal and Harchanan Nair for the Appellant/ Judgment Debtor [Messrs Rabinder Budiman & Associates]

DHARSHINI A/P GANESON (NO KP:580915-04-5068) DORAISINGAM A/L THAMBYRAJAH (NO KP:560523-08-5863)