SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 MarsdenLR 1174

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
TRANSPACC PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
BADAN PENGURUSAN BERSAMA PANGSAPURI AMAN LARKIN & ANOR – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: BA-12ANCVC-110-07/2021]



Petitioner Advocates:Toong Hui Joon ,Respondent Advocate: Arham Rahimy Hariri,Mohamad Ariffuddin Hanafi

Funds in a maintenance account under the Strata Management Act may be garnished for debts, while sinking fund account funds are restricted to capital expenditures.

Headnote:(A) Strata Management Act 2013 – Sections 10(4), 11(4), 23(1), 24(1), 24(2) – Garnishee order – Appeal against dismissal of application for garnishee order against maintenance account held under trust – Court found that funds in the maintenance account could be garnished to satisfy judgment debt, but sinking fund account funds could not be used accordingly due to statutory restrictions. (Paras 11-27)

(B) Trusts – Definition of trust regarding funds in maintenance and sinking fund accounts – Funds held by the developer for purchasers and then transferred to JMB and subsequently to MC do not remain trust funds but belong to respective bodies. (Paras 19-22)

(C) Garnishment – Only debts existing at the date of the garnishee summons can be garnished by the judgment creditor. (Para 28)

Facts of the case: The Appellant sought a garnishee order against the 2nd Respondent to recover due payments for services rendered. The Sessions Court dismissed the application for the second garnishee order, citing the accounts as trust accounts. (Paras 1-10)

Findings of Court: The Court determined that the maintenance account funds could be garnished, but the sinking fund account funds could not be used for non-capital expenditures. (Paras 26-27)

Issues: Whether the maintenance account funds could be garnished, and the legal nature of the accounts managed under the SMA. (Paras 19-28)

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the funds in the maintenance account do not remain trust funds once transferred to the Joint Management Body (JMB) or Management Committee (MC). The Court distinguished between the different accounts based on statutory provisions of the SMA. (Paras 24-28)

Result: Appeal allowed and the Sessions Court’s decision set aside; the matter is remitted for further action based on findings. (Paras 30-32)

JUDGMENT

Faizah Jamaludin J:

Introduction

[1] This is the Appellant's appeal against the Sessions Court's decision on 17 June 2021 to dismiss its application for a garnishee order against the 2nd Respondent ("R2") to garnish the monies standing to the credit of the 1st Respondent's ("R1") maintenance account and sinking fund account maintained at the R2 bank.

[2] The appeal is allowed for the reasons set out in this judgment.

The Facts

[3] The Appellant is a company providing property management services. R1 is the joint management body ("JMB") of the subdivided building known as Scott Tower Condominium ("Scott Tower"). R1 is established under the Strata Management Act 2013 (" SMA "). A JMB is a body corporate established under s 17(1) of the . It comprises of the developer and the purchasers of the parcel units in the development.

[4] R2 is a bank. R1's maintenance account and sinking fund account for Scott Tower, which it holds under the SMA , is maintained at R2.

[5] R1 was appointed to provide building management services for Scott Tower by building managing agent Meridian Inc Berhad ("D1") and Cemerlang Land Sdn Bhd ("D2") on 7 January 2015. On 7 October 2017, R1 took over the management and maintenance of Scott Tower from D1 and D2.

[6] The Appellant had provided building management services. However, D1, D2 and/or R1 had failed and/or refused to pay the sums due and owing to the Appellant for the building service provided. On 8 January 2018, the Appellant terminated their services and demanded the sum of RM 237,029.18 due and owing to the Appellant. D1, D2 and/or R1 refused to pay the sums due and owing to the Appellant for the period from January 2016 to January 2018. The Appellant commenced action against D1, D2 and R1 at the Sessions Court for the sums due and owing. R1 was the 3rd defendant in the Appellant's action at the Sessions Court.

[7] On 19 July 2019, a judgment in default was entered against R1 for the sum of RM 135,411.20 together with interest at the rate of 5% per annum from 24 January 2019 until the date of full settlement, and cost of RM 1,000.00.

[8] On 21 October 2019, the Sessions Court allowed the Appellant's ex-parte application for a Garnishee Order against R2 ("1st Garnishee Order"). On 5 November 2019, R2 paid the sum of RM 32,513.65 to R1's solicitors in compliance with the said 1st Garnishee Order.

[9] On 5 February 2021 R1 applied for a second Garnishee Order against R2 for the balance of the judgment sum ("2nd Garnishee Order").

[10] On 17 June 2021, the Sessions Court dismissed the Appellant'ss application for the 2nd Garnishee Order. The learned Sessions Court Judge ("SCJ") held that the monies standing to the credit of R1's maintenance account and sinking fund account with R2 cannot be garnished because the accounts are held on trust pursuant to ss 10(4),11(4),23(1) and 24(1) of the SMA .

Analysis

[11] Sections 10 (4) and 11(4) of the SMA state that a developer shall hold the monies in the developer's maintenance account and the sinking fund account on trust for the purchasers.

[12] By virtue of the provisions in ss 10(4) and 11(4) of the SMA , the monies standing to the credit of the developer's maintenance account and sinking fund account do not form part of the developer's property.

[13] Sections 10 (5) and 11(5) of the SMA state that in the event the developer enters into any composition or arrangement with its creditors or has a receiving order or an adjudication order made against it or it goes into liquidation, the monies in the developer's maintenance account and sinking fund account shall vest in and must be held by the administrator, official receiver, trustee in bankruptcy or liquidator (as the case may be) and transferred into a maintenance account and sinking fund account in the name of the JMB.

[14] Additionally, prior to the expiry of the developer's management period, the developer is required under s 15(1)(a) of the SMA to transfer to the JMB, all balances of monies in the develo


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top