Leonard David Shim JC:

[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the learned Sessions Court Judge delivered on 13 November 2020 (the decision) which allowed the Respondent's application for summary Judgment against the 1st and 2nd Appellants (the Appellants) for the following orders:

a) The Plaintiff's Application Summary Judgment entered against the Defendant be granted to recover the taxes due and payable amounting to RM188,426.51 for the Years of Assessment 2015 and 2016;

b) Inclusive of statutory interest at the rate of 5% per annum on RM188,426.51 from the date of Judgment until the date of realization of the said RM188,426.51;

c) Costs; and

d) Such further and other relief as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper.

[2] As this is an appeal against an order for summary Judgment made by the Sessions Court, it is trite that the appeal shall be by way of rehearing. In Malayan Insurance (M) Sdn Bhd v. Asia Hotel Sdn Bhd, 1987 MarsdenLR 715 ; [1987] CLJ (Rep) 182, the Supreme Court held:

"[1] The Appellate Court should not regard the appeal as a reviewing of the exercise of the Judge's discretion but should in practice approach the appeal as a rehearing."

Brief Factual Back