The liquidator's decision to reject a proof of debt cannot be interfered with unless shown to be unreasonable, and a creditor's claim for ownership is barred once they elect to claim liquidated damages.

JUDGMENT

(Enclosure 1)

Faridz Gohim Abdullah JC:

Introduction

[1] Enclosure 1 is a Notice of Motion filed by the Applicant, Quality Concrete Sdn Bhd under s 517 of the Companies Act 2016 and r 93 of the Companies (Winding-Up) Rules 1972 for an order that:

(a) Leave be granted to the Applicant to intervene in the proceedings;

(b) The decision of the Liquidator for the Respondent rejecting the Applicant's claim over Parcel No A-2-18 and Parcel No. A-2-19 of the housing development described as Taman Sentosa be reversed and/or varied;

(c) Alternatively, the Liquidator for the Respondent be ordered to admit the Applicant's Proof of Debt or such sums determined by this Court .

(d) Costs; and

(e) Any further and/or other relief as this Court deems fit and just.

[2] The application is supported by the Affidavit in Support affirmed by David Sim Wei Kuan, the Group Credit Controller of the Applicant.

[3] Having considered the application, this Court has decided to dismiss the same. Hence, this appeal.

[4] Below are my grounds of decision.

Brief Background Facts

[5] The Respondent, Besthouse Development (M) Sdn Bhd (In Liquidation) was the housing developer of a project named Taman Sentosa Project consisting of some 300 units of mixed development of residential, commercial and apartment buildings.

[6] The Respondent abandoned the said Taman Sentosa Project before its completion in the year 2005 and it was later wound up by a group of vendors in year 2010 via this Winding Up Suit No 28 July 2010-1 on 23 June 2010.

[7] The Official Assignee from the Director of General Insolvency Department was originally the provisional liquidator of the Respondent in 2010 until a private liquidator Wong Ching Yong was later appointed in 2013 ("the Liquidator").

[8] When the Liquidator took over the Respondent, the Liquidator avers that there were no records whatsoever of the Respondent in its office. The Liquidator had to work from scratch, conducting verification of the claims from various buyers of Taman Sentosa Project. The Liquidator was drag in and had to deal with numerous suits resulting from the housing Project including false or wrongful claims from the ex-management.

[9] This application concerns the claims submitted by the Applicant over two parcels of properties (apartments) of the Project ie A-2-18 and A-2-19 ("the Properties").

Cause Papers

[10] The following cause papers have been filed in respect of the Applicant's application:

(a) The Notice of Motion dated 21 August 2023 (Enclosure 1).

(b) The Affidavit in Support affirmed on 11 August 2023 (Enclosure 2).

(c) The Affidavit in Opposition affirmed by the Liquidator of the Respondent on 11 September 2023 (Enclosure 4).

(d) The Affidavit in Reply affirmed on 27 September 2023 (Enclosure 7).

Undisputed Facts

[11] The undisputed background facts as submitted by the Applicant are as follows:

(a) On or about 20 April 2014, the Applicant submitted its Proof of Debt ("the POD") dated 17 February 2014 to the Liquidator of the Respondent.

(b) The claim by the Applicant in the POD is based on two (2) Sale and Purchase Agreements dated 23 April 2005 for the Parcel No A-2-18 and Parcel No A-2-19 of the housing development described as Taman Sentosa ("the said Parcels").

(c) On or about 18 December 2020, the Liquidator had written to the Applicant to request for additional documents to be furnished to him.

(d) The Applicant had furnished on the liquidator the Applicant's Form 24 and two (2) copies of the Sale and Purchase Agreements both dated 23 April 2005.

(e) On or about year 2023, the construction of the said Parcels have been completed.

(f) On 13 June 2023, the liquidator had informed the Applicant that the documents were insufficient to prove ownership of the said Parcels and requested for better particulars in terms of ledgers, goods delivery notes, invoices and other documents.

(g) On or about 12 July 2023, the Applicant's advocates had replied to the Liquidator furnishing the Certified True Copy of the Credit Notes by t