Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judgment debt

Legal area

Court

29 Jan 2026

PEMPETISYEN CS NAM SDN BHD ALM TRADING SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-911-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-911-09/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Service was valid, the Sessions Court judgment was final and survived the High Court appeal, a further appeal without a stay does not negate the enforceability of the judgment, failure to satisfy the statutory demand within 21 days created a rebuttable presumption of inability to pay which the respondent failed to rebut, and there was no bona fide dispute or substantial cross-claim; accordingly a winding-up order was justified.
15 Jan 2026

PEMIUTANG PENGHAKIMAN TIONG JOO TRADING SDN. BHD. PENGHUTANG PENGHAKIMAN Lee Shaw Chin @ Lee Kim Leng

Citation

MA-29NCC-169-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

MA-29NCC-169-05/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The central question for decision was whether the Court of Appeal judgment of 27.07.2023 created a judgment debt sufficient to sustain the bankruptcy petition and whether the Senior Assistant Registrar committed reviewable error; the determination hinged on the legal characterisation of the judgment debt and the absence/presence of error in the registrar's decision.
11 Dec 2025

PEMPETISYEN DEVONPORT SDN BHD COLONIAL BEACH AND SPA RESORT SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28NCC-1191-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-1191-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The statutory demand was validly served and remained unpaid, creating the presumption of inability to pay under s466(1)(a); the Respondent failed to raise a bona fide dispute and adduced no evidence to rebut the presumption; AMGSB's alleged post-petition AOD did not create perfected security and could not defeat the properly founded winding-up petition under s472 — therefore a winding-up order was warranted.
11 Dec 2025

PEMPETISYEN DEVONPORT SDN BHD COLONIAL BEACH AND SPA RESORT SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28NCC-1191-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-1191-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The statutory demand was validly served and remained unpaid against a final judgment debt; no bona fide dispute or stay existed; the statutory presumption of inability to pay under s.466(1)(a) arose and was unrebutted; post-petition arrangements and an AOD executed after presentation of the petition could not defeat the petition under s.472; accordingly the Court had jurisdiction and correctly made a winding-up order.
10 Dec 2025

PEMPETISYEN SMALL MEDIUM ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT BANK MALAYSIA BERHAD HENG SENG & COMPANY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-201-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-201-02/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The statutory notice was validly served and the judgment debt remained unsatisfied beyond the 21-day period; absent any rebuttal evidence from the Company, the statutory presumption of inability to pay under the Companies Act 2016 applied, vesting the court with jurisdiction to grant a winding-up order which was therefore just and equitable.
29 Oct 2025

PEMPETISYEN MAR'S PARAGON RESOURCES SDN BHD LMS TECHNOLOGY DISTRIBUTIONS SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-480-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-480-05/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Respondent failed to comply with a valid statutory demand based on an existing judgment debt, which gave rise to a presumption of insolvency that the respondent did not rebut with independent evidence; accordingly the winding up petition was allowed.
29 Aug 2025

PEMPETISYEN AFFIN ISLAMIC BANK BERHAD GLOBAL VETERINARY SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-631-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-631-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court disregarded the Respondent’s late affidavit for failure to comply with mandatory rule 30(1); the Petition rested on a valid, unsatisfied judgment debt and a served statutory demand, giving rise to the statutory presumption of inability to pay under ss 465(1)(e) and 466(1)(a) of the Companies Act 2016 which the Respondent failed to rebut; accordingly the winding-up petition was granted with costs RM5,000.
13 Jun 2025

PEMPETISYEN AMBANK ISLAMIC BERHAD WS RENT-A-CAR SDN. BHD.

Citation

WA-28NCC-249-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-249-03/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Failure by the Respondent to pay the judgment debt within 21 days of a valid statutory demand gave rise to a rebuttable presumption of insolvency which the Respondent failed to discharge on the evidence; the petition was not an abuse of process and the Court will wind up the company and appoint the Official Receiver as liquidator.
15 Apr 2025

PEMPETISYEN 1. ) Chung Yoo Hock 2. ) Oceanergy Gases Sdn Bhd Zumatex Engineering Sdn Bhd

Citation

WA-28NCC-706-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-706-07/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that Zumatex’s failure to comply with a valid statutory demand triggered the presumption of inability to pay; the undisputed portion of the judgment debt exceeded the statutory minimum and Zumatex failed to rebut the presumption with its financial evidence; a pending suit challenging only parts of the judgment did not defeat the winding up petition as the judgment remains effective until stayed or set aside; accordingly the winding up order was justified.
4 Jul 2024

PEMPETISYEN PETRONAS LUBRICANTS MARKETING (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD RIGAZ SDN BHD

Citation

WA-28NCC-1104-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-28NCC-1104-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Respondent's failure to pay the judgment sum after service of a statutory notice created a rebuttable presumption of commercial insolvency which the respondent failed to rebut; the statutory demand sum was properly calculated and any inexactness does not defeat the petition; accordingly the winding up petition must be allowed.