Hamid Sultan JC:

[1] This is my judgment in respect of the appellant's appeal against the decision of the learned registrar's refusal to allow the appellant's application for discharge as a bankrupt made pursuant to s. 33 of the Bankruptcy Act 1967 (BA 1967) and r. 194 of Bankruptcy Rules 1969 (BR 1969). The appeal is only opposed by one creditor.

[2] The appellant (housewife) now aged 71 years was made a bankrupt by United Orient Leasing Co. Berhad, Kuching for failure to honour her obligations under a guarantee which she executed with her husband for business facilities which she had no benefit of. There were 17 creditors who filed the proof of debt the total sum of the same amounting to more than 9 million ringgit. The appellant had filed her statement of affairs on 5 October 1987. Public Examination was conducted on 19 December 1992 and the court had directed the appellant to pay monthly instalment of RM20 commencing from 1 January 1993. She has been paying the instalment without default. On 9 June 2005 the appellant made an application (encl. 97) for discharge as a bankrupt. The Official Assignee's report is very favourable to the appellant. The report shows that (i) the bankrupt is 69 years old with 4 children between 39-43 years old (ii) the bankrupt is only a housewife and did not have any other assets (iii) the bankrupt has not committed any offence under the Act in particular ss. 421 to 424 of the Penal Code. The relevant part of the report is reproduced below:

3. Mesyuarat Pertama Pemiutang-pemiutang telah diadakan pada 21/07/1988 dan tiada apa-apa resolusi yang telah diluluskan.

4. Pemeriksaan Awam telah ditetapkan pada 20/05/1988 tetapi telah ditangguhkan kepada 25/08/1988 dan tiada apa-apa resolusi yang telah diluluskan.

5. Pada Pemeriksaan Awam yang diadakan pada 19/12/1992, mahkamah telah mengarahkan agar sibankrap membayar ansuran bulanan sebanyak RM20.00 sebulan mulai 01/01/1993. Bayaran ansuran sibankrap adalah kemaskini.

6. Setakat ini, 17 bukti hutang telah difailkan terhadap estet sibankrap dan butirannya adalah seperti dalam Lampiran 'A' yang dikembarkan. Jumlah bukti hutang tersebut adalah sebanyak RM9,032,324.39.

7. Dengan baki kredit dalam estet sibankrap sebanyak RM20,676.10 hanya mencukupi untuk mengistiharkan dividen lebih kurang 0.185% kepada semua pemiutang. Sesalinan "sekim Pembayaran Dividen" berkaitan dengan pengiraan di atas disertakan dan ditandakan sebagai Lampiran 'B'.

8. Sibankrap sekarang berusia 69 tahun (lahir pada 19/04/1936) telah berkahwin dengan En Wong Ming Tah, tidak bekerja dan mereka mempunyai empat (4) orang anak yang berumur antara 39 hingga 43 tahun. Beliau hanyalah seorang surirumah. Kesemua anak beliau telahpun berkeluarga. Beliau sekarang tidak mempunyai apa-apa harta untuk dihasilakn.

9. Kebankrapan beliau adalah disebabkan menjadi penjamin bagi pinjaman perniagaan syarikat suami beliau, En. Wong Ming Tah.

10. Sepanjang pengetahuan Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi, sibankrap tidak melakukan kesalahan di bawah Akta Kebankrapan 1967 atau di bawah Seksyen 421,422,423 dan 424 kanun Keseksaan dan tiada bukti dikemukakan tentang fakta-fakta yang dinyatakan di dalam Seksyen 38 dan 109 Akta Kebankrapan 1967. Kelakuan beliau sepanjang kebankrapan adalah memuaskan.

11. Notis permohonan sibankrap untuk pelepasan di bawah seksyen 33 telah diterima oleh Ketua Pengarah Insolvensi pada 01/08/2005.

[3] The respondent/creditor objects on the following grounds:

(i) there is non compliance of r. 194 of BR 1969 by the registrar in that (i) the registrar must have forthwith sent a copy of the application for discharge for insertion in the gazette and (ii) the Director-General of Insolvency (DGI) must have sent a copy of such notice to each creditor who has proved not less than 14 days the day so appointed. Both of these provisions have not been complied with by the registrar.

(ii) there are no grounds given by the bankrupt to justify a discharge under s. 33 of BA 1967 when:

(a) 16 creditor