10 Mar 2022
22NCVC-61-12/2015 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Citation
- 22NCVC-61-12/2015 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Court
- High Court
- Case number
- 22NCVC-61-12/2015 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
The Security Agreement and contemporaneous documents unambiguously described the RM5,000,000 as a deposit not a loan, the continuing guarantee unequivocally made the 3rd Defendant a primary obligor for monies due by the 1st Defendant, and the 1st Defendant's counterclaim was time‑barred and procedurally defective (filed after close of pleadings without leave) and therefore dismissed.