Back
2019 MarsdenLR 3863
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
UNITED OVERSEAS BANK (MALAYSIA) BHD – Appellant
Versus
TEGAP BUMIJAYA SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: WA-22NCC-301-06/2019]
The burden of proof in summary judgment lies with the defendants to raise triable issues; mere denial of claims without substantiation is insufficient.
Headnote:This case involves a summary judgment application under O 14 r 1 of the Rules of Court 2012 for recovery of RM3,330,994.81 due to the defendants' default in payment under various credit facilities. The court finds no triable issues as the defendants failed to substantiate their claims regarding the interest rate and the handling of a fixed deposit; thus the plaintiff is entitled to recover the owed amount. The court concludes with a directive for the defendants to pay the plaintiff's claimed amount and costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. plaintiff's recovery action based on credit default. (Para 1 , 2 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. summary judgment application under o 14 r 1. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's analysis favors adherence to contractual terms regarding interest. (Para 4 , 15 , 19 , 24 , 26) |
| 4. defendants' arguments focus on interest rates and debt validation. (Para 8 , 12 , 14 , 16) |
| 5. establishment of proof requirements for summary judgment. (Para 18 , 20 , 21 , 35) |
| 6. defendants' claims about interest were unfounded. (Para 27 , 30) |
| 7. summary judgment awarded based on established debt. (Para 36) |
[1] This is a recovery action by United Overseas Bank (Malaysia) Bhd ("the Plaintiff") against Tegap Bumijaya Sdn Bhd ("D1") due to the latter's default under various credit facilities which was granted by the plaintiff to the defendant and against Chin Meei Yuh and Tan Kar Wee ("D2" and "D3" respectively) as guarantors who had guaranteed the repayment of the credit facilities granted by the Plaintiff to D1.
Summary Judgment (Enclosure 6)
[2] Enclosure 6 is the Plaintiff's application pursuant to O 14 r 1 of the Rules of 2012 (" ROC ") for summary judgment to be entered against the defendants for breach of payment of the balance principal sum of RM3,330,994.81 and interest at the rate of 2.25% per annum on the principal sum counted on monthly basis from 17 May 2019, until date of full settlement and costs.
Transfer Applications (Enclosure 9)
[3] Apart from the plaintiff's summary judgment application, the Defendants have vide encl 9 filed an application under O 57 ROC to transfer the suit to the High Court in Muar.
[4] I have decided to hear encl 6 first as it will render encl 9 academic if the application for Summary Judgment is allowed. Before considering the merits of the relevant applications, I will briefly set out the parties' respective pleadings.
The Respective Pleadings
[5] I turn to the Plaintiff's case against the defendants. Against D1, the Plaintiff pleads as follows:
"4. Atas permintaan Defendan Pertama, Plaintif telah memberikan kepada Defendan Pertama, pelbagai kemudahan kredit, di antasa lain satu kemudahan tred yang mengandungi surat kredit (LC), resit amanah (TR) dan juga penerimaan bank (BA) dalam jumlah principal sebanyak RM4,800,000.00 ataupun had-had semasa yang ditentukan oleh Plaintif ("Kemudahan tred tersebut").
5. Syarat-syarat dan terma-terma Kemudahan Tred tersebut adalah terkandung di dalam, di antara lain surat-surat tawaran bertarikh 4 Mei 2011, 22 Januari 2013 dan 25 Januari 2017 yang dikeluarkan oleh Plaintif kepada Defendan ("Surat Tawaran tersebut").
6. Syarat-syarat dan terma-terma utama bagi Kemudahan Tred tersebut adalah seperti berikut:
(a) Defendan Pertama berjanji bahawa apabila dituntut oleh Plaintif, Defendan Pertama akan membayar kesemua wang yang kena dibayar atau terhutang oleh Defendan Pertama kepada Plaintif di bawah Kemudahan Tred tersebut beserta dengan faedah dan lain-lain caj, kos dan perbelanjaan yang dialami oleh Plaintif dalam menguatkuasakan atau memperolehi balik wang yang kena dibayar atau terhutang oleh Defendan Pertama.
(b) Defendan Pertama akan membayar faedah dan/atau caj atas Kemudahan Tred tersebut pada kadar yang ditetapkan oleh Plaintif dari semasa ke semasa menurut Surat Tawaran tersebut.
(c) Bagi Kemudahan resit amanah (TR), Defendan Pertama berjanji membayar kepada Plaintif kesemua jumlah yang terhutang di bawah apabila resit amanah pada masa resit tersebut matang, dan sekiranya gagal, Plaintif berhak menarik balik Kemudahan tersebut.
(d) Jika Kemudahan Tred tersebut ditarikbalik, faedah pada 2.25% setahun (atau kadar lain yang ditentukan oleh Plaintif dari semasa ke semasa) atas kadar pinjaman asas Plaintif atas jumlah yang terhutang yang di kira pada dasar bulanan dan dikompaunkan pada setiap bulan atas dikenakan.
(e) Plaintif berhak:
(i) menentukan dan mengubah kadar faedah yang kena dibayar di bawah Kemudahan Tred; dan
(ii) mengenakan faedah kompaun pada kadar yang ditetapkan oleh Plaintif dari semasa ke semasa.
(f) Kes
