2016 MarsdenLR 2635

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
DATIN PADUKA NUR HAYATI MOHAMED – Appellant
Versus
JANAVISTA SDN BHD – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: 12BNCVC-45-06/2015]

Court retains discretion for compliance timelines under O 45 r 6(1), but must assess case specifics.

Headnote:This judgment addresses an application under O 45 r 6(1) of the Rules of Court 2012 to specify compliance times for a High Court order. The appellants' claims for specific performance were dismissed by the Sessions Court, with their counterclaim upheld. The court confirmed that respondents were obliged to deliver vacant possession before the appellants made payments. The central issues revolved around whether the purported termination of the sale agreement was valid, with the court noting the appellants' lack of timely action. As per Order 45 r 6(1), the court retains discretion to manage compliance timelines but found no justification for granting further extensions due to delays caused by the appellants.

Result: The Appellant's application is dismissed with costs.