Suriyadi Halim Omar J:

Pursuant to a summons for direction hearing, the Deputy Registrar on 7 November 2002 had fixed the gross reserved price at RM27,680,000 for the sale of three pieces of land, which were earlier subject to a High Court order of foreclosure. It was apparent to all and sundry that the summons for direction had a supporting affidavit, which contained a valuation report whilst the defendant had filed no affidavit in reply. With no affidavit in reply forthcoming the latter's position outwardly appeared precarious.

Even though acknowledging that this was a hearing by affidavit counsel for the defendant still requested for permission to be heard, which request was obliged by the Deputy Registrar. After a brave attempt by the defendant, and inspite of the ventilation of his views, the Deputy Registrar had meted out the current order, to be promptly followed by the defendant's notice of appeal.

Although I had stressed the necessity of evidence being given on oath, as it is a principle fundamental to Malaysia's adversarial system, the defendant's counsel before me in this appeal had strenuously applied to express his views again from the bar table, founded on th