Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Service of judgment

Legal area

Court

7 Jan 2025

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN MALAYSIA DEBT VENTURES BERHAD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN TANG SEE MENG

Citation

JA-29NCC-287-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-29NCC-287-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The debtor failed to dispute the amount within the mandatory period under s.3(2) Bankruptcy Act 1967 after valid substituted/registered-post service was effected; there is no obligation to include a statement of account in the bankruptcy notice and the court has no power to extend the statutory time limit; therefore the chamber summons to set aside the bankruptcy notice is dismissed and the debtor ordered to pay costs of RM1,000.
25 Nov 2024

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN MAYBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN NIM AI HUAT

Citation

JA-29NCC-485-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-29NCC-485-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Leave under s5(3)(b) was granted because the creditor had exhausted available modes of execution by virtue of the principal borrower's winding up and filing of proof of debt; there is no legal requirement to await Insolvency Department confirmation or completion of liquidation before granting leave, and the default judgment against the guarantor was validly served and not subject to being gone behind by the bankruptcy court.
6 Nov 2024

Anthony Raj A/L Ayakaram Joseph Yap Tian Tion

Citation

WA-12ANCC-72-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-72-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Extension of time was refused because appellant failed to provide a satisfactory and timely explanation for the approximately nine‑month delay; judgment had been properly extracted and served on appellant's solicitors and appellant personally had notice via Bankruptcy Notice by 8.4.2024; there was no evidence of non‑notification or immediate steps until August 2024; respondent proved the RM310,000 transfer and no triable issues of sufficient substance were shown to defeat summary judgment.
6 Nov 2024

Anthony Raj A/L Ayakaram Joseph Yap Tian Tion

Citation

WA-12ANCC-72-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCC-72-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Dismissal of the application was warranted because the appellant failed to provide a satisfactory and timely explanation for the nine‑month delay; the judgment had been properly extracted and served on the appellant's solicitors and the appellant had personal notice via a Bankruptcy Notice referencing the judgment; solicitor misconduct or bankruptcy of the former solicitor did not absolve the appellant from complying with time limits and no sufficient evidence of non‑notification or overriding merits was shown to justify extension.
18 May 2023

AFFIN BANK BERHAD 1. ) REDZUAN BALAGURU BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) MARIANA BINTI BAHARUDIN

Citation

JA-A72NCC-710-09/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JA-A72NCC-710-09/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Application dismissed because court found no procedural delay but the defendants failed to demonstrate a prima facie meritorious defence: plaintiff produced evidence of compliance with statutory hire-purchase formalities, defendants admitted indebtedness, contract clauses negated alleged oral promises/estoppel and plaintiff retained right to sue despite part payment; therefore default judgment remained properly entered.
20 Mar 2023

NPG GLOBAL PTE. LTD. MALAYSIAN GERMAN RESOURCES SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-22NCC-245-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-245-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application was dismissed because it was filed out of time without satisfactory reasons to justify an extension and, independently, the Defendant failed to demonstrate a bona fide defence or triable issues; the default judgment was regularly obtained and the contractual documents placed responsibility for supply and delivery on the Defendant; the Defendant's partial refund and correspondence amounted to acknowledgement of liability in respect of the deposit; costs awarded to Plaintiff RM3,000.
8 Mar 2022

PEMPETISYEN Umi Khairunnisa binti Mohd Soffian Lee, Federal Counsel for the Petitioner/Kerajaan Malaysia [Lembaga Hasil Dalam Negeri, Cyberjaya] Dato Vignesh Kumar and Nurul Aime binti Azwan for the Respondent [Messrs Balendran Chong]

Citation

PENGGULUNGAN SYARIKAT NO. WA-28NCC-269-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PENGGULUNGAN SYARIKAT NO. WA-28NCC-269-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Respondent failed to pay the sum demanded within 21 days and did not discharge the onus of proving ability to pay; alleged future receivables from JKR do not amount to present funds to meet debts; the judgment relied upon is final and the statutory demand effective; accordingly the Respondent is deemed unable to pay and the winding up petition succeeds.
6 Oct 2020

DYNAMIC ENGINEERING & PLANT SERVICES SDN BHD NO. SYARIKAT : 832210-D SASI KUMAR A/L BALAN NO.KP : 770320-05-5571

Citation

NA-A52NCVC-43-06-2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

NA-A52NCVC-43-06-2018 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The application to set aside the default judgment was dismissed because the default judgment had been regularly obtained and served, the defendant failed to establish a prima facie meritorious defence in affidavit form (only raised issues of identity/bare denial), and the defendant had knowledge of the judgment and did not act within the required time such that relief was not justified.
28 Jan 2020

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Hong Leong Islamic Bank Berhad PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Tambi Bin Nasirun

Citation

WA-29NCC-1257-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-29NCC-1257-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the Amended Judgment in Default was valid and sufficiently served by certificate of posting, constituted a final judgment for the purposes of issuing a Bankruptcy Notice, the Bankruptcy Notice was validly served (including by substituted service), the debtor failed to prove payment of the debt via standing instructions or to substantiate allegations of fraud or a counterclaim, and accordingly the creditor's appeal was allowed and the order of the Senior Assistant Registrar was set aside.