The court denied the application for a Retransfer Order under its inherent powers due to lack of legislative support and the absence of evident equitable fraud.

[1] The Judgment Creditor in these garnishee proceedings, Bank Kerjasama Rakyat (M) Berhad, ("the JC) was successful in appeals to the Judge in Chambers against the decision of the Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) to decline granting an Order Absolute against the garnishee banks in question. Before the decision of the Judge in Chambers, the funds in the bank accounts which were previously attached by the Order Nisi were taken out by the Judgment Debtor, Koperasi Serbaguna Iman Malaysia Berhad ("the JD").

[2] The JC then applied to the Court to garnish the funds taken out by the JD. The main issue before the Court is whether these funds can still be garnished under O 92 r 4 of the Rules of 2012 (" ROC 2012").

Background Facts

[3] On 6 January 2020 a judgment in favour of the JC was given pursuant to an application under O 14A of the ROC 2012 by this Court in Kuala Lumpur High Court Civil Suit No: WA- 22M-127-03/2019. It was adjudged that the JD was liable to pay the JC a total sum of RM317,836,534.74 as at 28 February 2019 and costs on solicitors-client and full indemnity basis ("the Judgment') pursuant to financing facilities given by the JC to the JD.

[4] On 14 February 2020, the JC filed a Notice of Application (encl 1) for a Garnishee Order against 6 garnishees, who are 6 different banks, to enforce the Judgment. Pursuant to the Garnishee Order to Show Cause or Garnishee Order Nisi obtained by the JC on 9 June 2020, the 1st Garnishee, Maybank Islamic Berhad ("Maybank'), confirmed that it held a sum of RM67,845.97 as at 26 June 2020 in the JD's account no 562405612785 with Maybank. The 5th Garnishee, Ambank Islamic Berhad ("Ambank'), confirmed that it held a sum of RM22,278.22 as at 2 July 2020 in the JD's account no 0662021001624 with Ambank. The JC only proceeded with the garnishee proceedings against Maybank and Ambank.

[5] On 28 September 2020, the learned Senior Assistant Registrar (SAR) dismissed the Notice of Application, declining to make an Order Absolute against Maybank and Ambank that all the debts due or accruing due by Maybank and Ambank to the JD be attached to answer the Judgment ("the learned SARS Decision").

[6] On 9 October 2020, the JC filed Notices of Appeal in encls 31 and 32 to appeal to the Judge in Chambers against the learned SAR's Decision on 28 September 2020 in dismissing the Notice of Application dated 14 February 2020 and in refusing to make the Order Absolute.

[7] On 2 February 2021, after hearing the submissions from the parties on the merits of encls 31 and 32, the Court allowed both encls 31 and 31 and made Order Absolute against Maybank and Ambank.

[8] Post Order Absolute, the Court directed the JD, Maybank and Ambank to provide information by way of affidavits about the flow of funds in account no 562405612785 with Maybank and account no 0662021001624 with Ambank, as well as to explain the status of funds in other accounts in order to assist the Court in determining the amount that should be garnished by the JC. Maybank and Ambank filed affidavits in explaining the status of the funds in the JD's accounts in Maybank and Ambank.

[9] The statements of account exhibited in Maybank and Ambank's affidavits show:

a) The total balances in accounts no 562807523162, 564397117057, 562405612792, 562405612785, 562405601703, 562405601698 and 562405506087 with Maybank as at 2 April 2021 amount to RM56,859.62; and

b) The total of the balances in accounts no 12021002264 and 662021001624 with Ambank as at 2 April 2021 amount to RM1,233.50.

[10] The statements of account exhibited in Maybank and Ambank's affidavits also show:

a) A withdrawal of RM206,540.