Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Post-dated cheques

Legal area

Court

27 Feb 2026

MEGAFEST SDN BHD (DALAM LIKUIDASI) 1. ) LIM KUI YONG 2. ) SIVANANTHAM A/L MUTHU KARPAN 3. ) LIM KWEE GEE

Citation

J-02(NCvC)(W)-764-05/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

NCvC
Case number

J-02(NCvC)(W)-764-05/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Payments to directors within two years that lacked documentary evidence or valuable consideration were void as undue voluntary settlements under s52 IA1967/s293 CA1965 and the directors who authorised them breached duties and are liable to repay; fraudulent preference under s53 IA1967/s293 CA1965 requires proof of a dominant intention to prefer and the date of giving post-dated cheques is the date of preference; applying these principles the Court allowed recovery against directors (Appeals 765, 761, 764), found no fraudulent preference in respect of the initial cheques given to Cemerlang Cok…
6 Feb 2026

KEJURUTERAAN BERPADU MAJU SDN BHD 1. ) MNH HOLDING SDN BHD 2. ) MAT NOOR BIN HARON

Citation

WA-A52NCC-2919-05/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

WA-A52NCC-2919-05/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Defendants signed a settlement agreement admitting the debt, furnished post-dated cheques and made a part payment; they failed to produce credible, consistent evidence of a bona fide triable issue on quality or specification, therefore summary judgment was appropriate for the outstanding debt with interest and costs.
14 Oct 2025

ANG HOCK HENG NGU TIENG UNG

Citation

WA-22NCC-564-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-22NCC-564-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Because the defendant elected no case to answer and led no contrary evidence, the court accepted the plaintiff's evidence as true, found the plaintiff proved he loaned RM 1,545,000 to the defendant and that the defendant failed to repay, and held forgery was not proven; accordingly judgment was entered for the plaintiff for RM 1,545,000 with interest and costs of RM 40,000 subject to allocatur.
23 Sept 2025

A.M.G GALLERY (M) SDN BHD YAYASAN AL AIM

Citation

WA-12ANCvC-184-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-12ANCvC-184-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found the lease had expired on 31.12.2022 and the month-to-month tenancy ended December 2023, there were no triable issues of fact, the appellant's defences and counterclaim disclosed no cause of action and were frivolous; accordingly summary judgment and strike-out were proper and the appeals were dismissed with costs.
21 Aug 2025

YANKONG STAINLESS SDN BHD 1. ) LATEX FORM SDN BHD 2. ) SARAVANA KUMAR A/L NARAYANAN 3. ) KONG MUK WENG

Citation

BL-A72NCvC-325-07/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BL-A72NCvC-325-07/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

On the balance of probabilities the Plaintiff proved the credit contract, delivery and acceptance of goods and that the 1.5% monthly late payment interest formed part of the agreed terms; Defendants failed to prove a binding waiver or full-and-final settlement; the personal guarantee was validly executed and not procured by legal duress; late stamping was remedied and did not invalidate the guarantee; the charged interest was simple not compound. Therefore Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the claimed late payment interest and costs.
19 May 2025

1. ) HO YOKE KIEN 2. ) LOH WOON PEI CHOW HENG

Citation

BA-12BNCC-15-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BNCC-15-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The transfers were in substance a loan of RM200,000 with RM4,000 monthly payments and repayable on demand; proof of a loan at interest invoked the statutory presumption in section 10OA MA1951 which the plaintiff failed to rebut; accordingly the agreement was rendered unenforceable by section 15 MA1951 and void under section 24 Contracts Act 1950; the appeal was allowed and the Sessions Court judgment set aside with costs to the defendants.
8 May 2024

SALURAN PASIFIK SDN. BHD. PETRO FLANGES AND FITTINGS SDN BHD

Citation

CA-A52NCvC-74-12/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

CA-A52NCvC-74-12/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The defendant failed to raise clear, bona fide triable issues. The undisputed contemporaneous documents (purchase orders, delivery orders, invoices) established a 60-day payment term and did not show any clear agreement that liability was contingent on third-party payment. Deliveries were acknowledged as received in correct quantity and good condition, and the defendant did not particularise delay. The post-dated cheque issue did not amount to a triable defence. Summary judgment was therefore appropriate in favour of the plaintiff.
7 Mar 2024

QQ MIRACLES SDN. BHD. HONG CHENG SEAFOOD SUPPLIES SDN. BHD.

Citation

AB-22NCC-3-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-22NCC-3-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities Plaintiffs proved the indebtedness by contemporaneous documents, admissions (letters) and part payments; Defendant failed to discharge evidential burden to prove goods were unmerchantable or caused the asserted losses; risk passed to Defendant upon delivery (s.23(2)); Caveat emptor and the buyer's failure to mitigate defeat the counterclaim; interest at 1.5% per month was allowed as proven practice and due under the parties' dealings. Therefore judgment for Plaintiffs and counterclaim dismissed.
27 Sept 2022

JETS MANAGEMENT (M) SDN BHD LOO THIN TUCK

Citation

AA-A52NCC-74-10/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

AA-A52NCC-74-10/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The Sessions Court found the defendant established triable issues such that summary judgment under Order 14 could not be granted, and separately determined the plaintiff's pleadings disclosed a reasonable cause of action so the defendant's strike-out/abuse of process application under Order 18 r.19 (and Order 92 r.4 jurisdiction) failed; res judicata/estoppel did not conclusively bar the claim because issues raised were not identical for that purpose.
27 Sept 2022

JETS MANAGEMENT (M) SDN BHD LOO THIN TUCK

Citation

AA-A52NCC-74-10/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

AA-A52NCC-74-10/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court found the defendant raised a meritorious triable issue (dispute as to nature of transactions, prior proceedings and potential res judicata/estoppel), therefore summary judgment under Order 14 could not be granted; simultaneously the pleadings disclosed a reasonable cause of action so the defendant's strike out application under Order 18 r.19 also failed. Both interlocutory applications were dismissed.