Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Service of bankruptcy notice

Legal area

Court

17 Jan 2024

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN KUALA EXCEL SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN CHUA LIANG HONG

Citation

WA-29NCC-1201-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1201-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the creditor's petition was valid because the act of bankruptcy occurred on 7 April 2022 when the Registrar dismissed the JD's application to set aside the Bankruptcy Notice under Rule 93(2), placing the petition within six months as required by section 5(1) of the Insolvency Act 1967, and the JD failed to produce credible evidence to rebut the authorised officer's authority so the petition's form was sufficient.
26 Sept 2023

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA) PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ZURAIDAH BINTI ABDULLAH

Citation

JA-29NCC-39-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-29NCC-39-01/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that issuance of the bankruptcy notice on 18.01.2023 constituted the commencement of bankruptcy proceedings and because section 5(3)(b) required leave before commencing proceedings against a non-social guarantor, the creditor's subsequent leave granted on 29.03.2023 could not operate retrospectively to validate the earlier notice; therefore the application to set aside the leave dated 29.03.2023 was allowed on that ground.
25 Oct 2021

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Dato’ Watson Peters and Lavendran Masilamany for the Judgment Creditor [Messrs Peter Chambers (Petaling Jaya)] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Abdullah for the Judgment Debtor [Messrs Muhammad Zahir]

Citation

KEBANKRAPAN NO. WA-29NCC-2160-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KEBANKRAPAN NO. WA-29NCC-2160-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeals were defective for non‑compliance with Form 114 but on merits the JD's late filing of affidavit in reply meant JC's averments were deemed admitted; the Bankruptcy Notice was properly issued and served (service on sole proprietorship firm valid); the judgment remained enforceable while unsuperseded and no sufficient reason existed to grant a stay; amendment of the Creditors Petition to correct the date was within the Court's power under s93(3), s131 and rule 282 and caused no substantial injustice; both appeals dismissed with costs.

Malaysia Case Law

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN KUALA EXCEL SDN BHD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN CHUA LIANG HONG

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA) PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN ZURAIDAH BINTI ABDULLAH

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Dato’ Watson Peters and Lavendran Masilamany for the Judgment Creditor [Messrs Peter Chambers (Petaling Jaya)] PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Muhammad Zahir Sanjay Abdullah for the Judgment Debtor [Messrs Muhammad Zahir]