Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
IFCI LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
BISHOPGATE CAPITAL LIMITED & ANOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction to plaintiff's claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. material terms of credit default risk insurance. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. short-term loan agreement details. (Para 8 , 9 , 14 , 16) |
| 4. claims filed officially post default. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. 2nd defendant's denial of liability. (Para 25 , 27) |
| 6. defendants' arguments and counterclaims. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 43 , 55) |
| 7. trial proceedings note. (Para 62 , 63) |
| 8. court issues for determination. (Para 64 , 66) |
| 9. jurisdiction issues. (Para 68 , 69 , 72) |
| 10. court's findings and summary. (Para 182 , 183) |
A. Introduction
[1] The Plaintiff claims that the 1st Defendant breached the terms of the Promissory Note Transaction Agreement dated 20 November 2017 and that the 2nd Defendant failed to pay the sums that are due under the Credit Default Risk Insurance Policy dated 20 November 2017.
B. Background Facts
[2] The 1st Defendant entered into a Promissory Note Transaction Agreement dated 20 November 2017 (PN) with Calfin Capital Private Limited (Calfin) and Gouttephone Technology Private Limited (GTPL). Calfin purchased the PN bearing number BGLPN001 to the value of USD 10 million from the 1st Defe
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
