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

2023 MarsdenLR 845

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CAPITAL CITY PROPERTY SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
ACHWELL PROPERTY SDN BHD & ORS – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Danny Ng ,Respondent Advocate: Nadiea Afiqah

Table of Content
1. originating summons details and judicial management order (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 6 , 10)
2. challenge to the consent order's validity (Para 12 , 16 , 20)
3. judicial observations on consent order's terms (Para 14 , 15 , 24 , 25)
4. criteria for setting aside a consent order (Para 19 , 21 , 27)
Ong Chee Kwan J:

Salient Background Facts

[1] The Plaintiff, Capital City Property Sdn Bhd ('Capital City') filed the present Originating Summons under Enclosurel ('the OS') seeking to set-aside a consent order dated 6 September 2021 recorded before Justice Tuan Nadzarin Wok Nordin in Originating Summons WA-28JM-9- 02/2022 ('the JM OS').

[2] The JM OS was an application filed by the Plaintiff for a judicial management order pursuant to s 409 of the Companies Act 2016 (' CA 2016').

[3] The Plaintiff is the developer of a subject project known under the name and style of 'Capital 21' which consists of a shopping mall service suites and a hotel ('the Capital 21 Project').

[4] The 1st Defendant, Archwell Property Sdn Bhd ('Archwell Property') is the proprietor of the land where the Capital 21 Project was located.

[5] The 2nd to 141st Defendants are purchasers of units parcel in the shoppi

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top