Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANG
GOLD COIN FEEDMILLS (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
GAO MENG SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. default judgement procedure (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. existence of guarantee and debt (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. grounds for setting aside judgment (Para 16 , 18 , 19 , 73) |
| 4. irregularity in judgement procedures (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 5. validity of guarantee terms (Para 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
| 6. undue influence and coercion in contracts (Para 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 66 , 67) |
| 7. court's final decision on applications (Para 69) |
Introduction
[1] The Plaintiff (P) commenced these proceedings against the 1st Defendant Company (D1) as well as D1's Directors ie the 2nd and 3rd Defendants (D2) and (D3) as guarantors for an unpaid amount of RM2,149,409.65 with interest for goods sold and delivered to D1.
[2] As no Memorandum of Appearance was filed on behalf of D1, P obtained Judgment in Default of Appearance against them on 27 of November 2024 (hereinafter referred to as "the said JID").
[3] An Order for substituted service was then granted in relation to D2 and D3 whereby the cause papers were served on them. Following that, D2 and D3 filed their Statement of Defence and Counterclaim
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
