An absolute assignment of rights can be enforced under Order 31 of the Rules of the High Court despite arguments advocating for Order 83.

Mokhtar Sidin JCA:

These two appeals were heard together. It is clear to us that these appeals originated from the same originating summons, namely Saman Pemula No. S4-24-669-1994. From the record it is clear to us that the learned trial judge heard the originating summons as one and gave only one decision and one ground of judgment. Because of that it is more convenient for this court to hear the two appeals together.

In order to avoid any confusion we will refer to the parties as they were in the court below.

The first defendant through five separate sale and purchase agreements (hereinafter referred to as "the said sale and purchase agreements") purchased five units of apartments at D'Village Condominium erected on a piece of land held under main title known as Geran No. 11011, Lot No. 36, Section 51, Bandar Kuala Lumpur from Navistar Sdn. Bhd. and Syarikat Trimal Sdn. Bhd. The five units are known as:

(1) Unit No. 07-2C/I/G, 7th Floor, Block I;

(2) Unit No. 09-2B/II/B, 9th Floor, Block II;

(3) Unit No. 13-2B/II/B, 13th Floor, Block II;

(4) Unit No. 13A-2B/II/B, 13Ath Floor, Block II; and

(5) Unit No. 08-2B/II/I, 8th Floor, Block I.

The strata titles to these properties have not been issued in order to finance the said purchase, the first defendant took up a term loan of RM600,000 from the plaintiff to be repaid within ten years by monthly instalments of RM7,706. As security for the said loan both the first defendant and the

plaintiff entered into a loan agreement cum assignment with power of attorney to transfer or deal otherwise with the five units of apartments.

Subsequent to that the term loan was increased from RM600,000 to RM700,000 repayable by monthly instalments of RM8,694 under the same terms and conditions originally given.

In November 1990, the plaintiff approved the following banking facilities to the second defendant:

(1) Letter of credit (sight) trust receipts (90) days of RM2 million;

(2) Trust receipt to include financing of D/P bills subject to sub-limit of RM500,000; and

(3) Foreign exchange contract (spot & forward) of RM2 million.

The security for the said facilities given was a loan agreement cum assignment over the said sale and purchase agreements with a power of attorney clause to transfer or deal otherwise with the subsequent second legal charge for the RM1 million when strata titles are available.

On 19 November 1990, the plaintiff granted a second loan in the sum of RM700,000 to the first defendant. As security for this loan a loan agreement cum assignment (hereinafter referred to as "the said agreement") was executed between the plaintiff and the first defendant whereby the first defendant absolutely assigned to the plaintiff all its rights and interest in and to the above-stated properties together with the full and entire benefit of the said sale and purchase agreements.

Contemporaneously with the said agreement, the first defendant also executed a power of attorney whereby the first defendant appointed irrevocably, the manager of the plaintiff bank for the time being as the attorney of the first defendant.

It is to be noted that on 8 August 1992, the defendants sold Unit No. 08- 2B/II/I, 8th Floor, Block I for the sum of RM245,000. It was alleged by the plaintiff that the unit was sold without its consent. Whether it is sold without consent or otherwise is not the concern of this appeal.

As such only four units remained (hereinafter referred to as "the said property") as security for the loan and the facilities given which are the subject matter of these appeals.

The defendants failed to service the loans and the facilities. On 12 October 1992, the plaintiff through its solicitors demanded full payment of the loans and the facilities given to both defendants. The defendants failed to make any payment. As a result, on 22 Au