Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Interest charges

Legal area

Court

4 Sept 2025

EZYCASH RESOURCES SURINDER JIT SINGH A/L GURMIT SINGH

Citation

ND-A72NCC-48-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

ND-A72NCC-48-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Defendant admitted signing and receiving funds but failed to particularize or provide documentary evidence of alleged statutory non-compliance or invalidity; general denials did not raise a triable issue, therefore Plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment under Order 14 ROC 2012 for the claimed debt with interest and costs.
2 Jul 2025

EAST COAST OCEAN BLUE SERVICE SDN. BHD. CEKAL SURIA LOGISTICS SDN. BHD.

Citation

BL-B52NCC-97-12/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BL-B52NCC-97-12/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Defendant’s Defence consisted of bare denials without particulars and failed to raise any bona fide triable issue; documentary evidence and admissions established liability for RM395,400.00; the Counterclaim alleging contravention of the Financial Services Act 2013 was inapplicable as the Plaintiff is a commercial service provider; accordingly the Defence and Counterclaim disclosed no reasonable defence or cause of action and were struck out under Order 18 r.19.
20 May 2025

AMBANK (M) BERHAD 1. ) TUA POOK GEE 2. ) TUA POOK SIK 3. ) SAWADI PG TRADING SDN BHD

Citation

KB-B52NCC-7-09/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

KB-B52NCC-7-09/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Application dismissed because court found service of writ, statement and judgment to the address specified in the Guarantee and defendant's identification was proper so the default judgment was regularly obtained; the applicant filed the application about 4 years after service of the judgment, failed to seek extension or give a satisfactory explanation for delay contrary to procedural rule requiring promptness, and failed to file an affidavit demonstrating a meritorious defence; accordingly the court exercised its discretion to refuse extension and to dismiss the application with costs.
10 Feb 2025

PERUSAHAAN OTOMOBIL NASIONAL SDN BHD U.C.M. AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS SDN BHD

Citation

BA-24NCC-87-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-24NCC-87-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The plaintiff failed both limbs of the Fortuna test: Proton did not demonstrate a bona fide dispute on substantial grounds regarding the alleged debt nor that presentation of the winding‑up petition would cause irreparable harm; Proton's conduct and partial payments amounted to admission or estoppel and mere denials of interest/claims were insufficient to defeat the statutory demand; accordingly the injunction was refused.
14 May 2024

MAA CREDIT BERHAD 1. ) BEST BIRDNEST SDN BHD 2. ) GREENPOWER VALUE SDN BHD 3. ) DATUK LIM SUE BENG 4. ) LEE SIAH SIAN @ LEE HAY MN

Citation

WA-22NCC-183-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-183-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court granted a conditional stay rather than an unconditional stay because the defendants failed to show special circumstances for an absolute stay; a conditional stay securing the principal judgment sum with stakeholders appropriately balances the parties’ interests and prevents prejudice to the plaintiff while preserving defendants' right to appeal. The defendants must deposit RM31,776,003.47 with the 1st defendant's solicitors as stakeholders within 14 days.
26 Mar 2024

PERSPEKTIF MASA SDN BHD SABAH DEVELOPMENT BANK BERHAD

Citation

BA-22NCvC-490-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-22NCvC-490-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed to establish a serious issue to be tried, failed to prove unconscionability, and did not make full and frank disclosure when obtaining ex parte relief; contractual terms rendered the lender entitled to pay on demand and Plaintiff accepted the conversion to a term loan and benefited; accordingly interim injunction refused and application dismissed with costs.
8 Dec 2023

MAA CREDIT BERHAD 1. ) BEST BIRDNEST SDN BHD 2. ) GREENPOWER VALUE SDN BHD 3. ) DATUK LIM SUE BENG 4. ) LEE SIAH SIAN @ LEE HAY MN

Citation

WA-22NCC-183-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-183-04/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the Agreement and the MLA permit the contractual 10% interest to continue after the loan period while an additional simple 8% p.a. default interest may be charged on arrears concurrently; those positions do not constitute compound interest nor breach Section 17 MLA; there were no triable issues and the 1st and 2nd Defendants' counterclaims were plainly unsustainable, justifying summary judgment and striking out the counterclaims.
12 Dec 2022

MANMOHAN SAMRA 1. ) Sandave Singh A/l Harbhajan Singh (Sebagai Wakil Harta Pusaka Harbhajan Singh A/l Gurmukh Singh, No. Kp: 630515065353, Si Mati) 2. ) SANDAVE SINGH A/L HARBHAJAN SINGH 3. ) TRANSFORM MIRAGE SDN BHD

Citation

CB-22NCvC-5-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-22NCvC-5-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the facts the Court found the transaction was a lawful loan/investment agreement and not a moneylending business under the Moneylenders Act 1951 because there was no evidence the Plaintiff carried on moneylending as a business; the contract was therefore not illegal under s.24 Contracts Act 1950; Plaintiff failed to prove any enforceable claim against the 1st and 2nd Defendants but established an unpaid balance of RM559,467.23 against the 3rd Defendant as admitted in evidence.
10 Nov 2022

1. ) KLK CONSTRUCTION SDN BHD 2. ) Kho Thean Chye [Notis Pemberhentian Di Kandungan 10] 3. ) Chan Keng Hock [Notis Pemberhentian Di Kandungan 10] TC HARDWARE SDN BHD

Citation

WA-12ANCC-99-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-99-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed summary judgment because the respondent produced consistent contemporaneous documentary evidence (purchase orders, delivery orders with company stamp and signatures, invoices, and reconciled statements of account) proving delivery and outstanding indebtedness; the guarantors' signatures were not credibly impugned and were sufficiently pleaded; the 1.5% monthly interest term was incorporated by agreement; the appellants' bare denials were insufficient to raise a triable issue to defeat summary judgment.
13 Jul 2021

AXIS ENIGMA SDN BHD KWANG SHEN STEEL INDUSTRIES SDN BHD & 2 ORS

Citation

WA-22NCC-100-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-100-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The 1st Defendant failed to demonstrate any bona fide triable issues: documentary evidence (invoices, delivery orders, contra vouchers, debit notes and surrendered cheques) established the debt and acknowledgment of terms including interest; lack of contemporaneous objection to debit notes and invoices precluded a triable defence, therefore summary judgment was appropriate.